--- title: "Project Blind Eye" type: "pdf" year: "2010" canonical: "/projects/770" --- # Mesa Police Department ![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/10-14_mesaredacted_appendix/img-0.jpeg) 2010 Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing Prepared by: Commander Steve Stahl # Table of Contents - [Mesa Police Department](#mesa-police-department) - [2010 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN](#2010-herman-goldstein) - [AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN PROBLEM-ORIENTED POLICING](#award-for-excellence-in-problem-oriented-policing) - [Summary: Project Blind Eye](#summary-project-blind-eye) - [Project Blind Eye:](#project-blind-eye) - [Central Division - 2009 UCR Part I Crimes on Main Street](#central-division-2009-ucr-part-i-crimes-on-main-street) - [Project Blind Eye Arrest Timeline- 630 West Main Street](#project-blind-eye-arrest-timeline-630-west-main-street) - [CENTRAL DAILY MISSION](#central-daily-mission) - [GRAVES: Lt Quesada](#graves-lt-quesada) - [PROPERTY CRIME TRENDS](#property-crime-trends) - [459C](#459c) - [459R](#459r) - [TARGET](#target) - [DAYS: Lt Penrose](#days-lt-penrose) - [Beat 31](#beat-31) - [SWINGS: Lt Ortega](#swings-lt-ortega) - [Robberies 12 for the last four weeks in the District. Top Time s have been 2000-2100 hrs. Top days are Mon, & Sat. Four are street jumps. Five Robberies are off of CC corridor.](#robberies-12-for-the-last-four-weeks-in-the-district-top-time-s-have-been-2000-2100-hrs-top-days-are-mon-sat-four-are-street-jumps-five-robberies-are-off-of-cc-corridor) - [Agg Assaults](#agg-assaults) - [Resid Burg- 20 for District 7 for swings TOP Beats & Days 32 (5), 33 & 37 (4) Sat, Sun & Tues](#resid-burg-20-for-district-7-for-swings-top-beats-days-32-5-33-37-4-sat-sun-tues) - [TRAFFIC:](#traffic) - [459V](#459v) - [FIELD CONTACTS](#field-contacts) - [FY](#fy) - [NOTE:](#note) - [Beat 32](#beat-32) - [Beat 33](#beat-33) - [Beat 34](#beat-34) - [Beat 35](#beat-35) - [Beat 36](#beat-36) - [Beat 37](#beat-37) - [Business Checks](#business-checks) - [Veh Burgs](#veh-burgs) - [Central Division - 2010 Calls for Service on Main Street](#central-division-2010-calls-for-service-on-main-street) - [Central Division - 2010 UCR Part I Crimes on Main Street](#central-division-2010-ucr-part-i-crimes-on-main-street) - [Central Division - Hotels/Motels](#central-division-hotelsmotels) # 2010 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN ## AWARD FOR EXCELLENCE IN PROBLEM-ORIENTED POLICING ## Summary: Project Blind Eye The City of Mesa Police Department has contended with Part 1 Crime, Part 2 Crime and Quality of Life crimes along the western Main Street corridor for many years. This corridor is made up primarily of Hotel/Motel facilities, Apartment Complexes and strip-mall type business complexes. The area is surrounded by single-family residences whose occupants primarily grew up in those homes. The area has also been presented with a new challenge, Light Rail. Project Blind Eye was crime fighting aimed at the top 10\% criminals and victims, the top high risk locations and the high risk activities along this corridor. This project began in October, 2009 and the main portion of the project concluded February 1, 2010. The results of this project are currently being evaluated as a catalyst for a Hotel/Motel Ordinance in the city. Research was extracted from the COMPSTAT Unit at Mesa PD, using calls for service statistics, Part 1 Crime Statistics, Warrant arrest statistics and on-going undercover operations. Initial research conducted from police reports indicated many repeat offenders, both suspects and victims. Officers and Detectives then began in-depth debriefs suspects and victims. They also increased consent stops, debriefing them and often developing confidential reliable informants out of these stops. This information confirmed our preliminary information of repeat offenders participating in high risk activities such as drug usage, drug sales, prostitution, theft and burglary. They also found these "people of interest" were using short-term stay facilities along the Main Street corridor to avoid police and neighborhood detection. At these facilities, they could participate in their dangerous criminal activity and in some cases; facility management would assist them in avoiding police contact. Operation Blind Eye incorporated Patrol Officers, Undercover Detectives, Community Action Officers, Crime Intelligence Detectives, Crime Analysts, Crime Prevention Specialists and the City Prosecutors Office to develop and implement a comprehensive approach to the issue. Past operations in this area had consisted primarily of undercover operations and went unnoticed by many of the residents. The mission of Operation Blind Eye was to identify, arrest and disrupt criminals with their criminal counterparts while changing the dangerous activities and locations where the criminals chose to prey on people. Results of the operation show a significant decrease in Part 1 Crime along the Main Street corridor. One problem Hotel/Motel elected to close their business rather than face a criminal abatement process. A second problem Hotel/Motel chose to change their business practices, which included the firing of management. # Project Blind Eye: The Mesa Police Department has used the COMPSTAT model of crime-fighting for three years. Three of the Mesa Police Department's goals are: 1) reduce Part 1 Crime by 7\% per 1,000 residents, 2) reduce residential burglaries by $10 \%$ and 3) reduce robberies by $7 \%$. This can be quite a daunting feat since the department has already reduced Part 1 Crime in the past three years by nearly $30 \%$. Having been recently transferred to this district responsible for the Main Street corridor, I quickly assigned the Crime Analyst and Crime Intelligence Officer to identify our top ten percent criminals and top ten crime locations. Together, we identified many of our repeat offender criminals were using "temporary-stay facilities" or Hotel/Motels as their residences. We also found many of our victims had extensive criminal histories. The victims were also using the Hotel/Motels as their residences. These Hotel/Motels of choice by the top ten criminals and victims were also the top ten crime locations of the district. Patrol Officers and Community Action Officers indicated they were contacting the same people day after day. Often, the people contacted were not engaged in criminal activity but they were engaged in dangerous activities. Detectives were also encountering a growing concern. Many victims of crime at these locations, especially violent crime, did not desire prosecution. In fact, some of the victims would not cooperate with investigators or give misleading information. Further research into suspects and victims in many of these cases showed these people had, in the past, committed crimes together. The initial analysis of the nature of the problem; highly active repeat criminals continuing their life of crime in areas where little or nothing was being done by property owners to prevent crime and victims continuing dangerous lifestyle activities in those same areas. The standard practice of arresting the criminals after the criminal act occurred was not adequately addressing the issue. Career criminals were continuing their life of crime against citizens and against other career criminals. Part 1 and Part 2 crime was rising at or near some of the Hotel/Motel properties. When criminals were arrested for their offenses, they were being released back into the environment where their consistent crime was going unchecked. A comprehensive approach would provide more desired results. The team analyzed a variety of forms of data to determine the course of action. This trend had been present for at least a year as indicated by CAD (Computer Aided Dispatching) information as well as RMS (Records Management System). Attachment \#1 shows the comparison of 2009 Part 1 crime to 2010 year-to-date. Attachment \#2 shows the comparison of 2009 calls for service to 2010 year-to-date. Attachment \#3 shows the density of Part 1 crimes along the Main Street corridor. This attachment was used to demonstrate the proximity of Part 1 crimes to Hotel/Motel establishments. This attachment is referred to later in this report to demonstrate the need for a Hotel/Motel ordinance that incorporates some of the measures we used to identify criminals in this project. The Mesa Police Department was also able to use a valuable tool, COPLINK. The computer program allowed the Criminal Intelligence Officer (CIO) to quickly mine through all of the police reports from Mesa as well as other surrounding jurisdictions and link people together. This program also links vehicles, nicknames, aliases, tattoos and other characteristics officers document in their police reports or contact cards. Attachment \#4 is one of the products the CIO produced and made available to all officers in the district. This allowed all officers to be aware of person's of interest to this project and instructed them to contact the CIO whenever any of these persons was contacted in the field. The Crime Prevention Specialist and I attended Community Forum meetings where citizens in the area were encouraged to openly discuss crime problems in the area. Many of the citizens were not aware of the Part 1 crime in the area but were aware of Part 2 criminal activity as well as quality of life issues. Citizens were also introduced to new ways of contacting the police department via text messaging and the internet. Both methods of contacting the police department are anonymous and provide the ability to make the contact as the crime is occurring. We also spoke with the Councilmember responsible for this district. This discussion confirmed his support of our actions. It should be noted police department representatives had met with ownership and management of the other problem hotel/motel establishment on numerous occasions. They had recently asked the police department to stay away from their property as they felt the presence of officers was chasing away their business. Ownership and management were once again offered CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) assistance along with other crime prevention training and refused; therefore, the police department refused their request to stay away. Officers were instructed in their daily mission to continue targeting criminals on that property. That ownership went out of business at the end of the year. A planning meeting was held consisting of Patrol Lieutenants, the Operations Lieutenant (responsible for Criminal Investigations, Gang Investigations, Undercover Investigations and Community Policing Officers), the CIO, the Crime Prevention Specialist, the Crime Analyst and the City Prosecutor. This meeting was geared toward developing an action plan addressing on- going criminal issues at the other top Hotel/Motel establishment in the district. During this meeting, the prior referred to attachments were discussed as well as a timeline chart, see attachment \#5. The timeline chart led us to believe management at this Hotel/Motel was either ignoring the criminal conduct and criminals in his establishment or may they be participating in the criminal conduct. The team knew resources would be limited to 1 undercover detective assigned full-time with 3 others assisting on a part-time basis. The team also implemented Community Policing Officers with a Civilian Crime Prevention Specialist to encourage management cooperation with the probability they would not cooperate. Because of the limited man-power resources, the team encouraged all patrol officers to assist whenever time permitted from the normal calls for service. This approach proved very successful as the patrol officers were very good at finding the known criminals from the intelligence given and continuously introducing themselves to them. Officers also received briefing training from the undercover detectives on "de-briefing" subjects and turning a contact into a confidential reliable informant. Without the use of the patrol officers, this project would have taken a substantially longer time and would have cost additional money in overtime from the detective unit. From this meeting, the following actions were put into place: - The Crime Prevention Specialist offered Hotel/Motel management CPTED training. The Crime Prevention Specialist played the role of "good cop". Even though she knew management was probably not being honest with her, she would offer assistance and gain information from management on a weekly basis; not only to offer a chance for success but to assist with prosecution later if that need arose. - The Community Policing Officers met with management and offered other crime-fighting tactics (i.e., free on-line criminal checks, asking for a valid form of photo identification at time of check-in and hiring private security). Management was also given a list of individuals currently under investigation by the police department as a suggestion for not renting rooms to those individuals. - Community Policing Officers were to stop by the Hotel/Motel daily to meet with management and offer assistance. - Patrol Officers from each shift would also visit the Hotel/Motel. They obtained the daily register and conducted warrant checks on guests and made traffic stops on known criminals. They shared this information daily with the Intelligence Officer who conducted analysis of known associates and disseminated the information to the Undercover Detectives assigned. See Attachment \#6, Central Daily Mission dated November 9, 2009 as an example of the daily mission given to officers. - Undercover Detectives would conduct covert surveillance and investigations on known drug dealers, drug users, prostitutes, burglars and traffickers of stolen property who were using this Hotel/Motel as their temporary residence. - A "pole camera" was installed to monitor activity on the property. - A "confidential reliable informant" was provided residence at the Hotel/Motel to gather information on known criminals and criminal activity on the property. - Detectives made arrests as necessary to further the investigation through corroborating interviews and evidence collected. - The City of Mesa Prosecutor's Office agreed to add terms of release prior to sentencing and at sentencing. These terms were to be trespassed from Main Street and $1 / 2$ mile both North and South of Main Street. These terms were only added to criminals who showed sufficient criminal history. Because some of the charges were Felony charges, the City Prosecutor created an on-going dialogue with the County Attorney's Office to add those conditions to their terms of release. This strategy proved to be extremely effective as the Intelligence Officer would post a "Trespass List" on the Central District Daily Mission for all officers to use in their crime-fighting efforts. This information was available to all officers on all shifts and all assigned work details. The information was also shared with all of the Hotel/Motel establishments along Main Street to allow them the opportunity to keep criminal activity away from their properties. See Attachment \#7, Mesa Police Department Main Street Trespass List. - All information gained was documented and used to write 5 separate search warrants on the property, to be served simultaneously. - District and Regional Management would be contacted by the Incident Commander at the time of search warrant service. These management representatives would be asked to attend a meeting outlining the problems and both short term and long term resolutions. The morning of the search warrants, it was decided the Community Policing Officers would be on property contacting the on-site manager. The team had received information the manager was calling rooms he was protecting whenever he believed the police were there to conduct an investigation. Since it was routine for the Community Policing Officers to contact him daily, this would seem like ordinary police contact and the manager would not feel the need to contact rooms. All search warrants were served without incident and this tactic proved successful as the criminal guests were caught by surprise: - 18 persons were arrested and/or detained on numerous counts of Possession and Sales of Narcotic Drugs and Dangerous Drugs, Prohibited Possessor of Firearms, Trafficking Stolen Property and several outstanding arrest warrants. - All 5 of the suspected rooms had packaging and saleable quantities of Narcotic Drugs, Dangerous Drugs and Marijuana. - Suspected rooms had stolen property along with evidence they were using the rooms for more than a temporary living facility. - Subjects detained and arrested provided valuable information about management. Immediately after the service of the warrants, the Crime Prevention Specialist and Community Policing Officers went to the other Hotel/Motel establishments in the district and gave each of them an updated trespass list, to include the newly arrested individuals. Each was again offered crime prevention tips and training. This information was also shared with the three other districts in the city to share with their Hotel/Motel establishments. The team then met with Regional Management of the Hotel/Motel establishment. Regional Management was extremely receptive to our crime prevention strategies. In fact, many of the strategies we suggested were already in company policy and were not being followed by property management. Regional Management fired the property manager and replaced him with a manager currently working with the police department to combat crime. An extra benefit received by working with the Regional Management was new management began participating in Community Forum meetings hosted by the police department. The Mesa Police Department now uses this Hotel/Motel establishment as an example for other similar establishments to model. Attachments \# 8 and 9, UCR Part 1 Violent Crimes, show the immediate results of the two properties in question. These attachments show the year-to-date statistics from 2010 compared to 2009 statistics. While these figures are a small portion of the crime totally eliminated, these suspects and associates are no longer present to create quality of life crimes. Nearly all of the victims in the 2009 Violent Part 1 Crimes on these two properties were also the suspects in the quality of life issues as well as the Part 2 Crimes of Narcotics Trafficking, as evidenced by the large number of arrests involving trafficking during the service of the search warrants. While the success of these two properties was realized by eliminating Violent Part 1 Crime and creating a Hotel/Motel management relationship/protocol, a look at Attachments \#10 and \#11 show work still needs to be done. Attachment \#10 is a density map indicating the 2010 year-todate calls for service problems along Main Street. Attachment \#11 shows the 2010 year-to-date Part 1 Crimes density along Main Street. Attachment \#12 shows the locations of the Hotel/Motel establishments on Main Street. Members of the team and patrol officers continue to work with all of the Hotel/Motel establishments along Main Street and have realized some displacement of criminals to the establishments who resist cooperation with the police department. Finding and arresting these criminals is quicker now because of the measures in place however, crimefighting resources are being used to enforce the same problems at different locations. Members of the team have now garnered the support of City Council to adopt a Hotel/Motel Ordinance. Many of the crime prevention strategies employed during this operation are being written into the ordinance. While some of the Hotel/Motel establishments are resistant to the ordinance, ongoing dialogue has begun and bi-weekly meetings are being held to ensure the needs of crimefighting are balanced with the desires of the Hotel/Motel industry. We are encouraged by the progress to date and expect a balanced ordinance by mid-summer, 2010. | UCR PART I CRIMES MAIN ST IN CENTRAL DIVISION JANUARY 1, 2009 - APRIL 30, 2010 | | | | | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | :--: | | CRIME TYPE | 2009 | 2010YTD | Total | | Forcible Rape | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Attempted Forcible Rape | 42 | 5 | 47 | | Robbery | 34 | 10 | 44 | | Aggravated Assault | 4 | 0 | 4 | | Burglary | 53 | 8 | 61 | | Larceny | 6 | 2 | 8 | | Motor Vehicle Theft | 414 | 121 | 535 | | Attempted Motor Vehicle Theft | 33 | 8 | 41 | | Total | 588 | 154 | 742 | | CALLS FOR SERVICE MAIN ST IN CENTRAL DIVISION JANUARY 1, 2009 - APRIL 30, 2010 | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | CALL TYPE | 2009 | 2010YTD | Total | | ABANDONED VEHICLE | 6 | 6 | 12 | | ACCIDENT NO INJURY | 90 | 26 | 116 | | ACCIDENT W/INJURY | 24 | 9 | 33 | | AGGRAVATED ASSAULT | 19 | 6 | 25 | | ARMED ROBBERY | 19 | 0 | 19 | | ARMED ROBBERY ALARM | 13 | 8 | 21 | | ARMED ROBBERY TRAINING | 1 | 0 | 1 | | ASSAULT | 56 | 20 | 76 | | BURGLARY ALARM | 261 | 89 | 350 | | CAT BITE | 0 | 1 | 1 | | CAT PICKUP | 3 | 0 | 3 | | CHECK WELFARE | 558 | 205 | 763 | | CHILD MOLEST | 14 | 2 | 16 | | CHILD NEGLECT | 6 | 6 | 12 | | CITY CODE VIOLATION | 90 | 28 | 118 | | CITY POLICY VIOLATION | 2 | 2 | 4 | | CIVIL MATTER | 224 | 68 | 292 | | COMMERCIAL BURGLARY | 34 | 5 | 39 | | CREDIT CARD FRAUD | 75 | 22 | 97 | | CRIMINAL DAMAGE | 129 | 49 | 178 | | CUSTODIAL INTERFERENCE | 20 | 4 | 24 | | DEAD BODY | 5 | 1 | 6 | | DEAD DOG | 3 | 0 | 3 | | DOG BARKING | 0 | 1 | 1 | | DOG BITE | 1 | 0 | 1 | | DRUGS | 194 | 55 | 249 | | DUI | 69 | 30 | 99 | | EMERGENCY MESSAGE | 2 | 2 | 4 | | ESCORTS | 71 | 7 | 78 | | FAMILY FIGHT | 78 | 26 | 104 | | FIGHT | 35 | 4 | 39 | | FOLLOW UP TO CASE | 111 | 30 | 141 | | FOLLOW UP TO CASE COMPLEX | 18 | 37 | 55 | | FORGERY | 6 | 3 | 9 | | FOUND PROPERTY | 35 | 15 | 50 | | H&R ACCIDENT NO INJURY | 38 | 12 | 50 | | HARASSMENT | 8 | 0 | 8 | | INDECENT EXPOSURE | 21 | 7 | 28 | | INFORMATION RECEIVED | 66 | 23 | 89 | | INSANE PERSON | 26 | 5 | 31 | | INTOXICATED PERSON | 25 | 11 | 36 | | JUVENILES DISTURBING | 59 | 37 | 96 | | KIDNAPPING | 1 | 1 | 2 | | LOOSE DOG(S) | 18 | 3 | 21 | | LOUD MUSIC/NOISE | 134 | 55 | 189 | | MISC. ANIMAL CALL | 9 | 1 | 10 | | MISSING PERSON | 37 | 20 | 57 | | NEIGHBOR TROUBLE | 14 | 3 | 17 | | OBSCENE PHONE CALL | 5 | 3 | 8 | | CALLS FOR SERVICE CONT. MAIN ST IN CENTRAL DIVISION JANUARY 1, 2009 - APRIL 30, 2010 | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | CALL TYPE | 2009 | 2010YTD | Total | | OFFICER ASSIST/MINOR | 0 | 1 | 1 | | ORDER OF PROTECTION | 40 | 3 | 43 | | OTHER AGENCY ASSIST | 209 | 70 | 279 | | PROSTITUTION | 66 | 9 | 75 | | PROWLER | 1 | 2 | 3 | | RECOVERED STOLEN VEHICLE | 31 | 3 | 34 | | RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY | 34 | 11 | 45 | | SECURITY SYSTEM PROBLEM | 2 | 0 | 2 | | SEXUAL ASSAULT | 11 | 2 | 13 | | SHOOTING | 3 | 1 | 4 | | SHOPLIFT/MINOR | 130 | 30 | 160 | | SHOPLIFTING | 77 | 25 | 102 | | SHOTS FIRED | 18 | 3 | 21 | | STOLEN VEHICLE | 148 | 25 | 173 | | STOLEN VEHICLE/BAIT CAR | 2 | 1 | 3 | | STRONG ARM ROBBERY | 11 | 1 | 12 | | SUBJECT W/GUN | 18 | 1 | 19 | | SUBJECT W/KNIFE | 6 | 1 | 7 | | SUBJECTS DISTURBING | 756 | 246 | 1,002 | | SUICIDE | 44 | 16 | 60 | | SUSPENDED LICENSE | 126 | 31 | 157 | | SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY | 217 | 79 | 296 | | SUSPICIOUS PERSON | 106 | 24 | 130 | | SUSPICIOUS VEHICLE | 54 | 9 | 63 | | TEMPORARY CUSTODY | 2 | 0 | 2 | | THEFT FROM BUSINESS | 135 | 42 | 177 | | THEFT FROM RESIDENCE | 45 | 17 | 62 | | THEFT FROM VEHICLE | 23 | 7 | 30 | | THREATS | 39 | 11 | 50 | | TRAFFIC CONTROL | 26 | 12 | 38 | | TRAFFIC HAZARD | 56 | 23 | 79 | | TRANSPORT | 2 | 0 | 2 | | TRESPASS | 386 | 148 | 534 | | UNCODED CALL | 206 | 69 | 275 | | UNKNOWN TROUBLE | 96 | 31 | 127 | | UNKNOWN TROUBLE ALARM | 13 | 3 | 16 | | UNKNOWN TROUBLE WIRELESS | 17 | 3 | 20 | | UNSECURED ACCESS POINT | 1,306 | 92 | 1,398 | | VEHICLE BURGLARY | 59 | 14 | 73 | | WARRANT ARREST | 562 | 124 | 686 | | Total | 7,816 | 2,138 | 9,954 | # Central Division - 2009 UCR Part I Crimes on Main Street | Legend | | | --- | --- | | 2009 UCR Part I Crime Density | | | - [ ] None to Low | | | | | High | | | | | 0 | 0.25 | 0.5 | | --- | --- | --- | | Miles | | | | 0 | 0.25 | 0.5 | | --- | --- | --- | | Miles | | | | W MCKELLIPS RD | | | --- | --- | | 37 | | | 51 | | | W BROWN RD | | | 36 | | | 34 | | | 53 | | | W MAIN ST | | | 54 | | **Citation date:** 05/07/2010 **Created by:** COMPSTAT # Project Blind Eye Arrest Timeline- 630 West Main Street ![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/10-14_mesaredacted_appendix/img-1.jpeg) ![img-2.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/10-14_mesaredacted_appendix/img-2.jpeg) # CENTRAL DAILY MISSION **Updated Monday, November 09, 2009** ## GRAVES: Lt Quesada ### PROPERTY CRIME TRENDS We are currently at the beginning of another spike. Continue to focus on suspicious pedestrians & vehicles. Grave officers have recently had good success in contacting and arresting thieves who were in the process or had just committed thefts/burglaries. ### 459C Commercial Burglaries have occurred at fast food restriants along Main St from Centenial Way to Longomre. Suspect is a B/M with black sweatshirt, white cotton gloves and white tennis shoes. Continue to patrol & write paper (be visual) in commercial areas. ### 459R Watch for open garages. If the opportunity presents itself, make contact with the homeowner, quickly educate those regarding crimes of opportunities, and have them close garage. ### TARGET 630 W. Main St (Motel 6) has been extremely active recently. Increase police contacts with motel 6 visitors coming and going. Management is in the process of being contacted regarding their in-take/client screening process. I want to be sure the motel patrons are clear that police will not tolerate criminal activity of any kind. Sergeants... please ensure our efforts are noted in the SSR. ## DAYS: Lt Penrose - Extra vehicle and foot patrol at the following locations for location, indentifying and FI'ing and/or GMIC'ing potential gang members: 1803/1812/1903/1930 N Country Club, 550 E McKellips and 1230 N Mesa Dr (Beats 35/36/37) - FI suspicious persons/vehicles/activities. Forward links to the Central CIU supervisor's role. - With upcoming cooler fall weather the transient population will increase and a spike in street jumps/robberies/Agg Assaults along Main St may be expected. Contact and FI suspicious persons and potential victims. FI and/or educate when appropriate. - Begin walk-thrus after 10:00am. ### Beat 31 Continue patrols at multi-housing units and motels on W Main. Continue to monitor light rail parking lot. Spike anticipated in early morning com burgs in Beat 31. Conduct patrols of businesses prior to them opening. ## SWINGS: Lt Ortega - Heavy Enforcement - Continued FOCUS @ Motel 6 630 W Main /150 S Roosevelt Alma School to Tempe Border, University to Main - Assign a two officer patrol vehicle to saturate parking lots/businesses/multi-housing. Zero tolerance for jay walking. All FI's are to be entered into RMS. ### Robberies 12 for the last four weeks in the District. Top Time s have been 2000-2100 hrs. Top days are Mon, & Sat. Four are street jumps. Five Robberies are off of CC corridor. ### Agg Assaults We have 8on swings. Top beats are 32(4) & 36 (3). The Top Times fall between 1800 hrs - 2000 hrs. Top days Tue, Sat & Sun. (7 in Multihousing complexes) ### Resid Burg- 20 for District 7 for swings TOP Beats & Days 32 (5), 33 & 37 (4) Sat, Sun & Tues ## TRAFFIC: Motors and Patrol: Continue zero tolerance enforcement of speeding in/around school zones as well as seat belt violations for the Nation Click It or Ticket campaign. For accident reduction, continue to enforce jaywalking statues and corridors along Country Club and Mesa Dr. ## 459V Due to recent activity/veh. Burgs, one additional area to focus on in 510 E. McKellips. Continue drive & walk throughs in the complex area. In addition, the area of 222 W. Brown recently had a vehicle burglarized. There appears to an increase of activity around Dobson & Main, and Main street in general from Dobson to Country Club. Continue to gather FI's, and issue citations to those who are deserving. As a reminder-zero tolerance for juveniles violating curfew - Don't forget to look for CI opportunities with your cases/these guys will turn on each other when pressured. ## FIELD CONTACTS Field interview cards - pedestrians, bicyclists, and suspicious vehicles in our target areas vs. random traffic stops. ## FY Data shows we have a strong increase in overtime, as well as sick time. Are they related? As we work harder don't forget to take care of yourself (Sleep, exercise, eat healthy, fly shot, etc.) If interested, see Officer Birnbaum for health & exercise tips. - Officer Birnbaum reports there have been a few questions reference to diet and nutrition. His door is open for all fitness and nutritional enquiries. ## NOTE: Graves has experienced a sudden increase in Bait Car Activity. Be sure to re-familiarize yourself with our bait car policy and procedures. This is a great tool to catch these type of criminals. Act promptly and think smart. ## Beat 32 Continue vehicle and foot patrols at multi-housing facilities, particularly multi-housing in the 900-1000 blk W Main. Monitor Beverley Park 100-200 N Beverley for graffiti and suspicious person. ## Beat 33 Continue patrols in high volume residential areas. Conduct education contacts, written and/or in person when a weak target is identified. ## Beat 34 Increase patrols in residential areas of grids AA11 for res burgs, veh burgs, and stolen vehs. Continue walk-thrus and educational contacts. Have a presence in residential area of Mesa Jr HI at beginning and end of school. Continue patrols in Escabedo for trespass, theft and burgs. ## Beat 35 Continue residential/multi-housing patrols. Continue high police presences in Riverview area and on Westwood and 8th St corridors near Emerson/Carson/Westwood Hi before and after school as well as at lunchtime. ## Beat 36 Continue vehicle/foot patrols on 8th/9th/10th streets west of Country club (multi-housing). Continue foot and veh patrols in high volume residential area for burgs. Continue to use door hangers and CEPTED forms as necessary. ## Beat 37 Conduct patrols in residential areas of AC11/AC12 for res burgs and auto thefts. Display police presence at Park of the Canals. Patrol areas, including multi-housing neighborhoods, around Brown and Mesa Dr area for deterrence of personal and property related criminal activity. Conduct educational contacts, written and/or in person when a weak target is identified. ## Business Checks Sgts. Please continue to do business and Bar Checks and Advise radio of the traffic stop. Top Business Address, Circle Ks Alma/8th(9), Alma/Main (8)- 1550 N CC (6), Dobson/Univ (8) Document your efforts in your SSR ## Veh Burgs There is a cluster in beat 32/33, from Center to CC, Univ to Main. Top Times are 1800-0200, top days are Mon - Wed. Top Beats 35 (9), 37 (15)There were several veh burg's at 510 & 550 E McKellips, Top Swings Multi housing CFS, 708 N CC (8) 2121 W Main (8), 150 S Roosevelt (12) 2433 W Main(8). Heavy enforcement and increased street contacts and Fls filled out on everyone contacted for these areas. Under GOHS's Click It or Ticket Campaign, there is Zero Tolerance on Seatbelt violations. Please cite all occupant protection violations observed in the State-wide effort to raise seatbelt usage. (Grant funding from GOHS is determined by our participation) | UCR PART I VIOLENT CRIMES 2130 W MAIN ST JANUARY 1, 2009 - APRIL 30, 2010 | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | CRIME TYPE | 2009 | 2010YTD | Total | | Aggravated Assault | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Attempted Forcible Rape | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Robbery | 5 | 0 | 5 | | Total | 8 | 0 | 8 | This report was created with preliminary UCR data. Statistics are preliminary and subject to further analysis and revision. Mesa Police Department Compstat Unit May 10, 2010 | UCR PART I VIOLENT CRIMES | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | 630 W MAIN ST | | | | | JANUARY 1, 2009 - APRIL 30, 2010 | | | | | CRIME TYPE | 2009 | 2010YTD | Total | | Aggravated Assault | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Forcible Rape | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Robbery | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Total | 7 | 0 | 7 | # Central Division - 2010 Calls for Service on Main Street ![img-3.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/10-14_mesaredacted_appendix/img-3.jpeg) **Legend** - **2010 Calls for Service Density**: 0.25 miles - **2010 Calls for Service Density**: 0.25 miles - **None to Low**: 0 miles **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 0 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | | Miles | 35 | 0 miles | | **Total Calls for Service Density** | | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | High | 2 | 0.25 miles | **Cities** | City | County | Calls for Service Density | | --- | --- | --- | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | # Central Division - 2010 UCR Part I Crimes on Main Street | Legend | | | --- | --- | | 2010 UCR Part I Crime Density | | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | | --- | --- | | None to Low | | | High | | | 0 | | | 0.25 | | | 0.5 | | | Miles | | | UCR Part I Crime Density | | # Central Division - Hotels/Motels ![img-4.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/10-14_mesaredacted_appendix/img-4.jpeg)