--- title: "Model City Community Revitalization" type: "pdf" year: "2001" canonical: "/projects/826" --- # 2001 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN AWARD SUBMISSION SUMMARY MODEL CITY COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION # Table of Contents - [2001 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN AWARD SUBMISSION SUMMARY MODEL CITY COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION](#2001-herman-goldstein-award-submission-summary-model-city-community-revitalization) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [MODEL CITY COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION](#model-city-community-revitalization) - [Award Submission](#award-submission) - [SCANNING](#scanning) - [How was the problem identified?](#how-was-the-problem-identified) - [Who identified the problem?](#who-identified-the-problem) - [How and why was this problem selected from among other problems?](#how-and-why-was-this-problem-selected-from-among-other-problems) - [What was the initial level of diagnosis/unit of analysis?](#what-was-the-initial-level-of-diagnosisunit-of-analysis) - [ANALYSIS](#analysis) - [What methods, data and information sources were used to analyze the problem?](#what-methods-data-and-information-sources-were-used-to-analyze-the-problem) - [History: How often and for how long was it a problem?](#history-how-often-and-for-how-long-was-it-a-problem) - [What harms resulted from the problem?](#what-harms-resulted-from-the-problem) - [What did the analysis reveal about the nature and extent of the problem?](#what-did-the-analysis-reveal-about-the-nature-and-extent-of-the-problem) - [What situational information was needed to better understand the problem?](#what-situational-information-was-needed-to-better-understand-the-problem) - [Was there an open discussion with the community about the problem?](#was-there-an-open-discussion-with-the-community-about-the-problem) - [RESPONSE](#response) - [What responses did you use to address the problem?](#what-responses-did-you-use-to-address-the-problem) - [How did you develop a response as a result of your analysis?](#how-did-you-develop-a-response-as-a-result-of-your-analysis) - [What did you intend to accomplish with your response plan?](#what-did-you-intend-to-accomplish-with-your-response-plan) - [What resources were available to help solve the problem?](#what-resources-were-available-to-help-solve-the-problem) - [What was done before you implemented your response plan?](#what-was-done-before-you-implemented-your-response-plan) - [What difficulties were encountered during response implementation?](#what-difficulties-were-encountered-during-response-implementation) - [Who was involved in the response to your problem?](#who-was-involved-in-the-response-to-your-problem) - [ASSESSMENT](#assessment) - [Who was involved in the evaluation?](#who-was-involved-in-the-evaluation) - [Were there problems in implementing the response plan?](#were-there-problems-in-implementing-the-response-plan) - [What response goals were accomplished?](#what-response-goals-were-accomplished) - [How did you measure your results?](#how-did-you-measure-your-results) - [What data supported your conclusions?](#what-data-supported-your-conclusions) - [How could you have made the response more effective?](#how-could-you-have-made-the-response-more-effective) - [Was there a concern about displacement?](#was-there-a-concern-about-displacement) - [AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION](#agency-and-officer-information) - [Project Contact Person](#project-contact-person) ## SCANNING Model City, one of Miami's oldest and most economically depressed neighborhoods had become a Focus for a wide range criminal activities which appeared to originate from an area of abandoned buildings and overgrown vacant lots. Law enforcement personnel, code enforcement specialists, government regulatory agencies, area residents, business owners, and other key community leaders recognized the negative impact that the decaying area had on their quality of life and economic viability. The area's stakeholders realized that revitalization of Model City and elimination of the rampant crime was absolutely essential to their commercial future and the overall quality of life in the neighboring residential enclaves. ## ANALYSIS In an effort to understand the underlying causes and circumstances surrounding the problem the law enforcement personnel reviewed neighborhood crime statistics, and collaborated with various regulatory agencies and community development organizations to determine the extent and nature of the problem and more importantly, to gain insight into the basic reason behind the community's history of deterioration. Analysis of the criminal element and their relationship with the location of the majority of the criminal activities provided law enforcement vital information to support development of a long-range plan to rejuvenate the neighborhood. ## RESPONSE Based on the results of the analysis, the response plan was developed and implemented. The law enforcement personnel identified the property owners responsible for the abandoned / unsafe structures and other violations, notified the appropriate regulatory agencies, coordinated the inspection process, monitored compliance, and if necessary, initiated the demolition scenario. Agencies responsible for health, sanitation and environmental quality enforced the various codes and forced compliance throughout the neighborhood. A collaborative effort with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies effectively curtailed the criminal activities of a notorious crime gang, eliminating the overpowering fear of crime that had permeated the community. Community development agencies focused their efforts on Model City and provided incentives and resources for improved housing and enhanced business opportunities. ## ASSESSMENT The transformation of the Model City neighborhood has been electrifying. The elimination of the abandoned structures and breakup of the notorious crime gang greatly reduced crime in the community. Strict enforcement of the health, sanitation and environmental codes improved the overall quality of life. New, moderately priced single family houses replaced the abandoned buildings and dilapidated multi-family buildings, and community pride and property values rose significantly. Incentives and a more promising economic outlook tempted new businesses to the area. New city-funded recreational facilities replaced overgrown vacant lots and the citizens enjoyed a new sense of community in this once distressed area. Reduced crime statistics are simply one measurand of success. Renewed economic activity and increased property values also provide insight into the revitalization of the neighborhood. Most importantly, the positive attitudes of the citizenry and the inspiration for further improvement is truly the most critical mode of assessing success. # MODEL CITY COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION ## Award Submission ## SCANNING What was the nature of the problem? Model City is one of the City of Miami's oldest, and most economically depressed neighborhoods. The problem addressed by the City of Miami Police Department's Model City Problem Solving Team - in a joint effort with several government regulatory agencies - focused upon the criminal activities associated with several abandoned structures in the neighborhood. Equally important was the issue of environmental crimes and noncompliance with health and sanitation codes. The overarching problem to be addressed was the revitalization of a community that had deteriorated to an extremely economically and socially distressed condition. ## How was the problem identified? The Miami Police Department Problem Solving Team (PST) police officers assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team (NET) along with the NET code enforcement staff received numerous complaints from the residents, community associations, and business owners concerning the abandoned and unsafe structures in their neighborhood. These structures had become a focal point for illegal narcotics trafficking and use and a haven for the homeless people in the area. The community members also reported several instances of illegal dumping in the vacant, overgrown lots located throughout the neighborhood. Additionally, the City of Miami Building and Zoning Department and the Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management were also notified regarding this particular issue. The Model City Weed and Seed Program members expressed concern as the neighborhood continued to deteriorate as a result of the criminal activity. # Who identified the problem? - City of Miami Police Department Problem Solving Team personnel assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team - Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team code enforcement personnel - Neighborhood residents, business owners, and property owners - City of Miami Building and Zoning Department - Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management - State Attorney's Office - City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail and Special Investigations Section ## How and why was this problem selected from among other problems? To understand the rationale behind the Model City Revitalization project, it is vital to understand the situation that formed the foundation for the problem. Model City, one of the City of Miami's oldest communities, is a multidimensional neighborhood with residential, commercial, cultural and educational enclaves, all forming a single community of quiet homes and entrepreneurial efforts. The 1980's were devastating for this community. Racially motivated violence destroyed businesses and homes, leaving in its wake abandoned buildings, unemployment, and rampant poverty. The economic recession that gripped the region in the 1980's had a significant impact on Model City. From 1980 to 1990, the poverty rate in Model City increased and unemployment remained well above the national average. From 1990 to 1995, total jobs in the area fell by over 47 percent. Additionally, a notorious drug gang known as the "John Does" had taken control of the neighborhood's streets. Model City was in crisis, and very few remedies were on the horizon. The area's stakeholders realized that any effort to revitalize this community would require a series of critical elements - upgrade housing, lower population density, create employment, curtail crime, improve schools, enforce codes, and attract strategic investment in sustainable businesses. With the revitalization goal in mind, government and business leaders came together to draft a plan to eradicate the disparities in economics, jobs, education, housing, and criminal justice in the neighborhood. Community based organizations stepped up to reclaim their neighborhoods from the crime and pollution. The Problem Solving Team, with its focus on the criminal issue, was a vital element of this effort. # What was the initial level of diagnosis/unit of analysis? In the Model City project, the initial level of diagnosis for the City of Miami Police Department was the level of crime associated with the abandoned structures - illegal narcotics trafficking, vagrancy, prostitution, homeless, and illegal dumping. The deteriorating health, sanitation and environmental situations provided the initial level of diagnosis for the various regulatory agencies with jurisdiction in the area. ## ANALYSIS ## What methods, data and information sources were used to analyze the problem? To effectively address the issues of unsafe structures and environmental violations, the Problem Solving Team officers realized that they needed to be extremely familiar with the existing legal statutes and procedures that were relevant to the deteriorating situation. It was critically important to identify the various official and quasi-official regulatory agencies that had jurisdiction and enforcement responsibilities for the wide range of hazardous situations that comprised the overall problem. Access to the information regarding property ownership and current addresses of the owners (many were absentee owners) was key to implementation of the program. # History: How often and for how long was it a problem? The problem in Model City is a daily occurrence with the drug related criminal activity occurring during the nighttime hours. Model City began to deteriorate in 1980 when racially motivated rioting resulted in deaths and injuries, wide spread destruction, economic collapse and unemployment. The recession that followed further exacerbated the situation and Model City was unable to recover - socially or economically. Who was involved in the problem and what were their respective motivations, gains and losses? Multiple segments of the community and government were involved in creation of the problem as well as the development and implementation of the solution. One aspect of the problem lies with the property owners who have allowed their properties to deteriorate, continue to collect rent from their rental units, and eventually allow the properties to become uninhabitable. These property owners noted the overall decline in the neighborhood and, anticipating minimal financial gain, were unwilling to further invest in the maintenance of their properties. As long as the regulatory agencies maintained alaissez faire attitude toward enforcement of unsafe structures and code violation statutes, the property owners disregarded their properties. As the number of abandoned structures increased, the presence of a criminal element increased accordingly. The abandoned structures became a haven for illegal narcotics trafficking as dealers and users alike were drawn to these sites where their illegal activities were usually unobserved by law enforcement patrols. Narcotics traffickers realized increased profits as the drug sales and usage soared in the neighborhood. The abandoned buildings also attracted a growing homeless population drawn to the neighborhood for shelter. With the declining economic situation in the neighborhood, several commercial entities sought less costly methodologies of disposing of their waste. These businesses took advantage of the availability of several vacant, overgrown lots in the neighborhood and utilized them as waste disposal sites. This illegal practice resulted in serious health and environmental hazards. On the other hand, some commercial establishments, despite difficult economic conditions, continued to comply with all codes and restrictions. The owners of these businesses were active in efforts to revitalize the community, realizing that their economic success depended upon a significantly enhanced neighborhood. Several residents remained in the neighborhood in the face of the deteriorating situation in the community. These residents were deeply impacted by the flourishing crime, as their fear of crime and quality of life curtailed the normal social interaction that previously characterized their community. These residents also realized that a revitalization program was essential to halt the rapid decline in their property values and return the community to normalcy. Several regulatory agencies were involved in developing and implementing a solution to the problem. Motivated by a wide range of grievances from residents and commercial entities, these agencies focused their efforts on the code violations, unsafe structures, health and environmental issues as well as the criminal activities. Their efforts required a reallocation of scarce resources and dedication of a great deal of time to all phases of the project. However, the ultimate result of their efforts was a safer, healthier, and economically solid neighborhood, where fewer code violations demanded reduced city and county resources, and decreased calls for service resulted in fewer police responses in the area. Rejuvenation of the community would be impossible without the participation of organizations committed to supporting redevelopment efforts in the neighborhoods. Motivated by the opportunity for involvement in this major revitalization program, these organizations focused on acquisition of demolished properties, supporting funding efforts and providing counseling for citizens benefiting from the program. # What harms resulted from the problem? The crisis that enveloped Model City spawned several damages. Of primary concern to the Problem Solving Team was the high level of criminal activity that was associated with the abandoned structures in the neighborhood. A fear of crime had permeated the community and residents either retreated into the safety of their homes or fled the area in search of more secure neighborhoods. The proliferation of vacant, overgrown lots resulted in widespread illegal dumping and pollution, which, also was of concern. The crime and pollution contributed to the overall distressed state of the neighborhood. How was the problem being addressed before the problem-solving project? What were the results of those responses? Prior to the assignment of the Problem Solving Team officers, the problems in Model City were addressed by more traditional law enforcement and code enforcement procedures. Regulatory agencies conducted periodic inspections and issued violations and levied fines for noncompliance. Police officers responding to calls for service simply addressed that particular call without focusing on the underlying situation that created the problem initially. Frequently an "us against them" relationship developed between the law enforcement and regulatory agencies and the citizens and business owners in the area. The result was that isolated violations and crimes were addressed in a "business as usual" attitude, but the ultimate cause of the general malaise that infected the community remained unresolved. What did the analysis reveal about the causes and underlying conditions that precipitated the problem? The deterioration of the Model City neighborhood throughout the 1980's and into the 1990's is considered to be the major cause of the problem that is impacting the neighborhood today. Property owners perceived little or no financial gain in maintaining their properties. As a result, the number of abandoned and unsafe structures proliferated and the criminal activities associated with this situation increased accordingly. Under severe fiscal constraints, business operators resorted to "cost cutting" methods (such as illegal dumping of trash and draining of hazardous fluids into vacant lots), several of which were not in compliance with health, sanitation and environmental codes. Various permits and licenses were not acquired and a wide range of codes and regulations were ignored. # What did the analysis reveal about the nature and extent of the problem? The analytical effort identified the nature of the problem as two fold. The unsafe and abandoned structures created a criminal problem characterized by illegal narcotics trafficking and the associated criminal activities. The calls for service and crime rates in the neighborhood had risen to a point that the residents fled to other areas, seeking a better quality of life and decreased fear of crime. The rampant non-compliance with codes and regulations created a sanitation, health and environmental problem. In concert, the extensive crime crisis and the deleterious sanitation and environmental situation had created a negative atmosphere that precluded any type of investment in the neighborhood. ## What situational information was needed to better understand the problem? The Problem Solving Team developed a keen insight into the situation that was the genesis of the problem. They needed to understand the rationale for property owners to allow their properties to deteriorate and eventually become abandoned. To address the ongoing health and sanitation problems, the Problem Solving Team needed to comprehend the reasons that the commercial interests in the area had resorted to illegal practices such as illegal dumping and failures to acquire the proper permits and licenses. # Was there an open discussion with the community about the problem? Yes. The Problem Solving Team met frequently with various community organizations, including the Model City Weed and Seed Program members, the association representing the apartment owners, as well as the business owners. These meetings encouraged the open exchange of information on the problems and were critical sources of data regarding the situations in the neighborhood. ## RESPONSE What range of possible response alternatives were considered to deal with the problem? The Problem Solving Team considered a range of response alternatives. Among the alternatives considered was the more traditional, reactive approach of simply responding to calls for service and addressing that particular issue. Code enforcement personnel considered a similar approach of conducting periodic inspections, citing violations and levying fines. From a more pro-active perspective, consideration was given to developing a response based upon the results of a more extensive investigation into the underlying cause of the problem. This methodology would involve coordination with other regulatory agencies and dedication of resources to focus on the issue through to the successful end result. ## What responses did you use to address the problem? The Problem Solving Team applied a detailed pro-active response to address the problem. Coordinating closely with other regulatory agencies focused on building and zoning, health, sanitation, law enforcement, and environmental issues, they developed an effective strategy to deal with the problems. This methodology allowed the Problem Solving Team to identify property owners responsible for various violations, request inspections, monitor compliance, and, if required, initiate the demolition process. Additionally, this joint approach allowed the Problem Solving Team to pursue the enforcement of the various environmental crimes statutes resulting from the situation in the neighborhood. From the law enforcement perspective, the Problem Solving Team coordinated a collaborative effort with law enforcement agencies from federal, state and local jurisdictions focusing primarily on reducing the number of homicides, robberies, and burglaries in the community. # How did you develop a response as a result of your analysis? The analysis phase focused upon the causes, nature and extent of the problem. The results of this analytical effort convinced the Problem Solving Team that the appropriate response required the implementation of a joint effort involving many regulatory agencies, law enforcement elements, community groups, and other governmental organizations. This joint effort allowed the various organizations to coordinate their regulatory activities, resources, strategies, and ultimately, the implementation of the penalties of non-compliance - in some cases, demolition of the noncomplying properties and arrests of criminal offenders. What evaluation criteria were most important to the department before implementation of the response alternative(s)? The evaluation criteria applied by the department to support the decision to implement the program was the extraordinary crime rate and high level of calls for service. A related criteria was the overwhelming fear of crime and depressed quality of life of the neighborhood residents. Also supporting the judgment of the department to implement the response was the deteriorated economic state of the community. Businesses were failing, housing projects were being vacated by fleeing residents, and property values were plummeting to new lows. Investments were nonexistent. ## What did you intend to accomplish with your response plan? The response plan was designed to accomplish the following goals: - Significantly reduce environmental pollution by curbing illegal dumping. - Improve sanitation and health standards in the neighborhood by enforcing the appropriate codes and regulations. - Reduce the fear of crime in the neighborhood by reducing the criminal activity with emphasis on the "John Does" drug gang. - Reduce the homeless, vagrant and criminal population in the area by eliminating the abandoned structures, which provide shelter to these elements. - Promote a partnership between the business and community leaders and the government officials responsible for enhancing the quality of life in the neighborhood. - To "change the landscape" and beautify the community through landscaping projects and elimination of abandoned structures and overgrown vacant lots. - To increase property values and make the community attractive to new investments through a general improvement in the overall quality of life and economic situation. # What resources were available to help solve the problem? - City of Miami Police Department Problem Solving Team personnel assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team - Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team code enforcement personnel - Neighborhood residents, business owners, and property owners - City of Miami Building and Zoning Department - Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management - State Attorney's Office - City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail, Special Investigations Section, Crime Suppression Teams, Narcotics officers, and Field Operations Division patrol officers - City of Miami Unsafe Structures Board - City of Miami Legal Department - United States Environmental Protection Agency - City of Miami Fire Department inspectors - City of Miami Health Department - City of Miami Hotel and Restaurant Inspection Department - Model City Weed and Seed Program - City of Miami Department of Housing Development and Conservation # What was done before you implemented your response plan? Prior to implementing the plan, the City of Miami Police Department utilized the more traditional law enforcement methodologies (routine patrols and specialized tactical operations) that focused solely on the criminal element. This strategy overlooked the conditions that existed in the community that allowed the crimes to occur. ## What difficulties were encountered during response implementation? In a program this unique, innovative and requiring participation of multiple agencies, the difficulties were numerous. - Regulatory agencies involved in the program lacked the manpower resources to adequately focus on the issue. - Early in the program, the lack of funding support for the demolition process was a major hurdle to be overcome. - The budget approval process, as it relates to the demolition program, is cumbersome and does not respond to the timelines dictated by the revitalization program. Monies required to support the demolition process frequently "bogged down" in the budget deliberations. - The legal entities involved in the program did not have personnel trained in enforcing the environmental violations, and were reluctant to become involved in enforcing the unsafe structures statutes. - Locating property owners through official channels was difficult at times, and uncooperative owners created problems throughout the demolition process. - Interdepartmental coordination and communications shortfalls hampered the implementation of the demolition process. # Who was involved in the response to your problem? - City of Miami Police Department Problem Solving Team personnel assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team - Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team code enforcement personnel - Neighborhood residents, business owners, and property owners - City of Miami Building and Zoning Department - Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management - State Attorney's Office - City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail and Special Investigations Section - City of Miami Unsafe Structures Board - City of Miami Legal Department - United States Environmental Protection Agency - City of Miami Fire Department inspectors - City of Miami Health Department - City of Miami Hotel and Restaurant Inspection Department - Model City Weed and Seed Program - Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team Citizens on Patrol members # ASSESSMENT What were the results? What degree of impact did the response plan have on this problem? The results of the program were multiple: - Enforcement of the illegal dumping statutes reduced environmental pollution in the neighborhood. - Enforcement of the appropriate codes and regulations improved the sanitation and health standards. - Eliminating the abandoned and unsafe structures in the neighborhood significantly reduced the homeless, vagrant and criminal population and reduced the fear of crime. - The community and business leaders formed a partnership with the regulatory and law enforcement agencies to focus on enhancing the quality of life and economic health of the neighborhood. - Landscaping projects and elimination of the overgrown vacant lots have beautified the community. Although simply cosmetic in nature, this effort has had a positive effect on the quality of life in the neighborhood. - Property values and the overall economic well being of the community have been enhanced and the area is attracting new investments and residential construction. The degree of impact that these results have had on the Model City area is characterized by several developing situations and a positive attitude on the part of the residents. New, moderately priced single, family houses are being constructed in areas cleared by the demolition of unsafe and abandoned structures. These houses will attract new residents to the community and will promote a "pride of ownership" in the residents that does not normally exist in multiunit apartment complexes. New investments in the area include construction of a new supermarket by a major supermarket chain, and construction of a new drugstore by a major drugstore management corporation. These and other new investments in a rejuvenated Model City will have a direct and positive impact on the tax base for the City of Miami. The decreased crime rate has resulted in a return of the normal social interaction that had characterized this community in the past. In the Model City neighborhood, the homicide rate for 2000 dropped 36 percent when compared with 1999 (from 14 homicides in 1999 to 9 in 2000), burglaries were down 18 percent (from 667 to 548), robberies were down 26 percent (from 398 to 294), total Part I crimes were down 9 percent (from 3677 to 3343), total arrests were down 32 percent (from 5679 to 3855), and calls for service dropped 12 percent (from 33,081 to 29,023). In collaboration with the neighborhood organizations, crime watch programs were created and Citizens on Patrol teams deployed to the community. Community organizations have consistently praised the efforts of the program and the residents no longer feel threatened in the neighborhoods. What were your methods of evaluation and for how long was the effectiveness of the problemsolving effort evaluated? The revitalization of Model City is a "work in progress" and as such, the evaluation process is ongoing. The Problem Solving Team reviews the crime statistics provided by the City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail noting trends, crime "hot spots" and types of crime in the area. A review of the instances of calls for service also provides insight into the effectiveness of the program. The most lucrative and substantive method of evaluation is through personal observation by members of the community who have been associated with the neighborhoods for an extended period. Long-term residents, business owners, and assigned patrol officers are the best sources of information on the positive changes in the community. These elements of the community have a vested interest in the overall well being of their particular neighborhoods, and are keenly aware of the most subtle changes. An additional evaluative method is the market analysis performed by any major corporation considering an investment in a community. This type of analysis is extremely objective and will support a key investment decision. # Who was involved in the evaluation? - City of Miami Police Department Problem Solving Team personnel assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team - Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team code enforcement personnel - Neighborhood residents, business owners, and property owners - City of Miami Building and Zoning Department - Miami-Dade County Department of Environmental Resource Management - State Attorney's Office - City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail and Special Investigations Section - City of Miami Unsafe Structures Board - City of Miami Legal Department - United States Environmental Protection Agency - City of Miami Fire Department inspectors - City of Miami Health Department - City of Miami Hotel and Restaurant Inspection Department - Model City Weed and Seed Program ## Were there problems in implementing the response plan? Yes. A response plan of this scope involving multiple and diverse organizations will have a variety of implementation problems. - A resource shortfall within the agencies supporting the program was a major problem, as these agencies were unable to deploy the personnel required for effective implementation. - Early in the implementation phase there was a funding shortfall for supporting the demolition process. - The timelines of the budget approval process, as it relates to the demolition program, were inadequate to support the response plan. - The lack of trained personnel in the legal entities involved in the program created a serious problem in the enforcement and litigation phase. - Locating and notifying property owners and dealing with uncooperative owners was a problem encountered throughout the demolition process. - Coordinating the efforts of the many agencies involved in the process was a major problem. Several agencies were unable to support the timelines of the project. - The States Attorney's Office lacked the legal authority to enforce the unsafe structures statutes. - Various "loopholes" in the unsafe structures regulations hampered program implementation. # What response goals were accomplished? - Environmental pollution was reduced. - Sanitation and health standards were improved. - Homeless, vagrant and criminal population has been reduced. - The fear of crime has been reduced and the quality of life in the residential community has been enhanced. - The community and business leaders have formed a partnership with the regulatory and law enforcement agencies to focus on enhancing the quality of life and economic health. - The neighborhood has been "beautified" as a result of landscaping projects and elimination of the overgrown vacant lots. Property values and the overall economic well being of the community have been enhanced and the area is attracting new investments and residential construction. # How did you measure your results? Results were measured by multiple methodologies: - Ongoing crime analysis efforts focused on trends, crime types, frequency, and "hot spots" prior to the program initiation and during the implementation. - Periodic meetings with community and business leaders were fora to measure and evaluate the program results. - Direct observation by community members and patrol officers assigned to the area. ## What data supported your conclusions? Although the program is an ongoing effort, the conclusion at this juncture is that the program has been successful. This is supported by the following data: - An analysis of crime statistics reveals that criminal activity has decreased significantly. - A review of calls for service indicates that the requirement for police support has decreased. - An increase in the levels of investments in the area as well as increased residential property values signals an improvement in the overall quality of life in both the commercial segment of the community as well as the residential element. ## How could you have made the response more effective? - Improved coordination with the various agencies supporting the program to assure the commitment of adequate resources to the program response including initial funding for the demolition process. - Develop a better understanding of the impact of the budget process on the timelines required for an effective demolition program. Provide accurate estimates for the costs of planned demolitions to insure that the budget allocations are adequate and timely. - Improved coordination with the legal entities involved in the program to insure appropriately trained personnel to deal with enforcement and litigation. - Improve the procedures involved in locating and notifying property owners. - Review the unsafe structures regulations to identify potential "loopholes" and remedy the shortfalls. # Was there a concern about displacement? In any major program involving the homeless population in a major metropolitan area will create a concern about displacement of homeless people. In the City of Miami, the Coalition for the Homeless and the Homeless Assistance Center is responsible for addressing the homeless problem. These organizations provide a variety of services including counseling and employment placement programs. In the Model City program, these support organizations responded and strove to keep the displacement of the homeless population to other areas of the city at a minimum. Doubtless, the criminal element that previously operated from the abandoned structures in Model City has relocated to other areas of the City of Miami. The displacement situation is an issue of great concern for the City of Miami Police Department. Will your response require continued monitoring or a continuing effort to maintain your results? Yes. Problem Solving Team officers will continue to maintain close interaction with the community leaders and encourage an ongoing dialogue regarding mutual interests in the neighborhood. Enforcement of health, sanitation, and pollution codes and regulations will require periodic revisits to ensure total compliance on the part of the business operators. Routine police patrols will be required to enforce a wide range of federal, state and local law enforcement statutes. # AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION At what level of the police organization was this problem-solving initiative adopted? The law enforcement personnel assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team were involved in this initiative with support from the City of Miami Police Department Crime Analysis Detail and the Special Investigations Section. Did officers or management receive any training in problem oriented policing and/or problem-solving before this project began or during its execution? Yes. Officers and managers received 16 hours of problem-solving training. Were additional incentives given to police officers who engaged in problem-solving? The major incentive to the officers engaged in this problem-solving issue is the development of experience and expertise in community policing methodologies and philosophies and the implementation of problem-solving techniques to the issues that affect the quality of life in their communities. Officers selected to participate in problem solving projects are assigned to specialized units where they develop valuable investigative skills and vital "people skills." What resources and guidelines (manuals, past problem-solving examples, etc.) were used, if any, by police officers to help in managing this problem-solving initiative? Officers involved in this initiative utilized standard problem-solving techniques. The Miami Police Department has produced problem-solving forms, Community Policing manuals and videos. What issues/problems were identified with the problem-oriented policing model or the problem solving model? None. The problem oriented model was appropriate in addressing this issue. What general resources were committed to this project, and of those resources, what went beyond the existing department budget? Problem Solving Team officers assigned to the Model City Neighborhood Enhancement Team were committed to this project. Resources were within the departmental budget. # Project Contact Person a. Name: Michael Colombo b. Position/Rank Lieutenant c. Address 400 NW Ave d. City/State Miami, Florida 33128 e. Phone (305)579-6648 f. Fax (305) 5796657 g. E-mail Michael Colombo@Miami-Police.org