The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutItem #39 - First Reading OrdinanceTO: r r..0.4 : Joseph R. Grassie City Manager' /44trti cP !.Cart/ Kenneth I. Harms Chief of Police CITY INTtR.O11CI ;Ii:P,IC�`. i�1D1IPA September 14, 1979.it1LL: LEG 9-2 ordinance for Burglary` and Robbery Alarm CNCLUSIIrt 3: • The attached ordiance, which I recommend, entitled "Burglary and Robbery Alarm Ordinance" is a joint effort of the Police and Law Departments. I have previously requested to have this item tentatively included on the agenda for the City Commission meeting. on September 27th, 1979. The Police Department has been studying ways to ameliorate the growing false alarm problems since 1969. Only in the last few years, however, has the magnitude of the problem reached crisis proportions. These trends are being experienced on a nation-wide basis. Many cities have adopted a wide rangeofcontrol mechanism with varying degrees of success. After evaluating the impact and cost effective- ness of each, we have proposed an ordinance with the underlying philosophy that it should be: fair to all parties not restrict reliable alarms simple to enforce and. comprehend entail a minimum of business regulation protect the privacy and confidentialltY of the alarm users - place the responsibility on the alarm; user rather than the. alarm industry which will, in turn, force the alarm industry to improve reliability that costs be repaid by those who disproportionately abuse • police resources constitutionally sound to=withstand` The monies generated by this .ordinance would;' offset,, the, costs of administration and the cost of actual: police.. response tohe scene. Hopefully,; the net result will. eventually lead', to a reduction in: the number of false -alarms by making unreliable alarms more costly to operate than more reliable alarms. ''SUPPORTIVE DOCU 11 ENT FOLLGV ' CITY COMMISSION MEETING OF SEP271979 so Page 1 of 4 4414-041:0•40Aef' ti Joseph R. Grassie Kenneth I. Harms PERTINENT DATA September 14' 1979 Burglary/Robbery Alarm OTdinance 1 - Existing alarm installations are estimated between 7,000 and 9,000 in the City. Approximately 95% to 97% of these alarms are installed at places of business. The remainder are residential installations. Southern Bell marketing data lists the number of business locations in the City as 28,620. 38,000 Occupational Licenses are issued annually by the City. For every one business with an alarm system, between two -and -a -half and three business are without alarms. At current trends of property crime growth, insurance permium growth, alarm industry competition and growth, the number of alarms installed should increase twenty to twenty-five percent yearly. 2 - 98% of all installed alarms are leased from alarm companies - the remaining 2% are user -owners. 3 - 4% of received calls are audible while 57% are silent ('76) . 4 - Casual factors in burglar alarm activation are actual offenses (1%) ; attempted offenses (1%) ; defective alarm (26%) employee error (22%) ; other (2%) ; unknown non -criminal origin (48%). 5 - Owners did not respond to assist with investigation in 57-6 of incidents. Alarm company representativesdid not respond to 68% of these incidents ( 7 )* 6 - Alarm signals have gone from,3.87% of the total calls for service in 1969 to 8% in 1978. 7 - Business burglaries (as opposed Ito residential) represent 37% of all burglaries. 8 Business robberies (as opposedto street and 'residential robberies) 'represent 9% of all robberies, ( 78) 9 - The median time on the scene of alarm calls has gone from 9 minutes in ' 76 to 1.2.7 minutes in ' 78 . Sample . data for ' 79 indicates times are now averaging 1.8.4 minutes with a standard deviation of 31.3minutes. 10 - In 1969, 39 addresses were responded to in excess of 15 times per year. In 1977, 344 separate locations were responded to more than 15 times each. 'SLJ P P T1 F DOCUMENTQI FOLLC,Af'' Joseph R._:Grass ie"` Kenneth I. Harms September 14, 1979 'Burglary/Robbery Ordinance 11 - Burglary alarm signals have progressed as follows: This 12 1969 1972 1975. 1976 1977 1978 - 4,247.alarms - 8,117 alarms - 12,564 alarms 10,989 alarms 19,325 alarms, 19,040''alarms represents a 348% increase since 1969. Actual. burglaries and robberies have increased as follows:' YEAR ROBBERIES BURGLARIES 1969 2,749 7,094 1972 2', 555_ 8,294 2°,,657 13, 224 19.7 5 1976 2,316 10,850 1977 2, 421,; 10037 • 1978 2',832; 9,635 increase. since 1969 3 3 6 % Page f, 4 Joseph R. Grassie Kenneth I. Harms COST `' ANALYSIS A - An average estimate of number'. of police personnel on the scene of an alarm call is 2.7 (including one or more back-up units, with 'one. or two officers per vehicle). B - Effective October 7, 1979, the median salary of patrol officers will be $8.80 per hour (with three years of service). With fritige benefits of 50%, the average hourly cost to the City is $13.20 per hour per officer. Administrative overhead for uniforms, vehicles, dispatch records, supervision, support services, etc., is not included in this figure. C - Extrapolating the gross cost of 19,040 burglar alarms @18.4 minutes each and @$13.20 per hourfor an average response of 2.7 officers per alarm; the costs to the City are $208,099 per year to respond to alarms, 98% of which are false. D. to administer this ordinance are: $ 2,800 postage (19,040 at 15 each) 4,200 police salaries and fringe benefits. (calling in brief reports - one minute @22 per minute) pro -rated clerical support, hearing officer, coordinator, etc. E. The ordinance sets out that a copy of the police report will ac- company the bill for service. These reports normally are provided at a fee of eight dollars($8.00) pursuant to City ordinance. The $25.00 fee will cover the costs of report generation on the Computer Assisted Report Entry System. F. The projected revenue for FY 79-80 at 100% compliance would be $476,000. Given the collection process and lack of stiff sanctions, a more realistic level of compliance would be 60% - or an equivalent "revenue" of $285,000. G. During FY 80=81, the level, of compliance should increase to 80% while the number of false alarms should decrease to approximately 15,000 per year thereby generating "income" of $300,000. H. If the anticipatedrate of decrease in false alarm calls is not realized within eighteen months, the City will explore a combination of alternatives: (1) increasing fees or using a sliding scale; (2) issuing alarm user permits; (3) refusal to respond to or reduce re- sponse priority for habitual violators; (4) license installers set- ting strict technical standards. KIH:cw. cc: Law Department Finance Departments "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" G.IPatrick Gallagher, .Director i, Police Executive Institute 1909 R Street, M. W. Suite 400 Ziashington, D. C. 20006 ar Pat, 'lank you for including the City of Miami as a resource in the Alarm Management Study. As you know, the City of Miami faces an acute dilemma with regards to false alarms. Mot only are our scarce resources being constantly depleted, but my officers' safety is imperiled by subtle psychological expectations that each alarm is false. On the other hand, we actively encourage installation of relaiable alarm syste-'s as an adjunct to rou- tine patrol or surveillance. The problem has been studied in the past by our department. re are very supportive of your efforts in this regard and will provide whatever assistance is possible. • At the present time, an alarm ordinance is being prepared for the City of Miami. Other cities are experiencing difficulties in administering their alarm ordinances. The h:Inribook described in your concept paper could potentially contribute to our docu- mentation and control efforts. Under consideration are reporting alternatives through our Computer Assisted Peport Entry (CARE) . Computer Assisted Dispatch (CZD)or cruse resource allocation and mapping systems. Manual interim systems may be necessary. Responding to your questionnaire, I have attached a description of the process utilized. I have also included prior'studies on the problem; a draft ordinance under development; the Dade County ordinance dealing with automatic telephonic dialing taped alarms; competency certification for alarm installers and the intentional generation of false alarms. 'SUPPORTIVE FOLL0 EIff : cw LRB Attachments bc: Tom Connors - Asst. Chief Doherty- Asst. Chief Griffin - Major Gunn - Sgt. Wiggins Crime Prevention Unit - Planning & erely, .(444taZjigu,,,, renneth I. Perms Chief of police Inspections METH 0 D 0 L G Y The answer to question of the survey was estimattd'by Mr: Jerry Woodall, past -president: of Florida' Chapter of National Burglar Alarm Association., He'wi"ll be : -polling Members 'companies at our request for response to`your inquiry. The answer to question.6 is year-end totals produced by our Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD)System. The answers to,questions .8,•9,-10 and 11 are derived from a non-random sample of the first 3,712 incidents of a 1977 printout of each of the 19,325 alarm incidents gener- ated that year. .This printout was for each extracted burglary/,alarm incident which was then sorted first by block number and then by street or avenue. This sample thus contains a preponderanceof downtown addresses or addresses along Flagler Street and Miami Avenue (our quadrant dividing lines) The answer -to question-.10,showing 266 responses, is to an.office building with 230 offices, primarily Jewelry- oriented, at38 N'. E. 1st Street.' The answer to question 11, showing 211 responses, is: to an`office building with 116-offices at.117 N..E 1st Avenue.'` Noother. location showed these excessive trends. This printout (which is ten inces high). is available for your analysis - providing security and:individuahit is maintained. The answer to question 15 is based on;a previous analysis of seven ...., n weeks"of'data. More detailed information from 1978 data is pending a statistical printout oriented:'. towards norms and distributions of time spent on the- 'scene of all calls for service. Jl r r •,1 ! t 11 �-.. M POLICE EXECUTIVE I'ISTITUTE' ALARM DATA SURVEY N.B. Please respond to .the following questions with an estimated number. Exact figures are not necessary. Please confine your answers to either 1977 or 1978.If.any questions are not applicable or a number is impossible to calculate, please so state with "N/A" or "Unavailable." Jame of Police Executive: KENNETH .L. `:HARMS ?lame of Police Agency: CITY OF MIAMI : POLICE DEPARTMENT Address:'. 400 NW. 2nd>Avenue, Miami, Florida 33128 Telephone Number: (305) 579-6565 !lame of person completing Y questionnaire: L. R. BOEMLER"dataear of 1977 1. Does your city/county/statehave ordinances or codes maintenance, or operation of burglar alarm systems? Tlo burglar alarms 2. Approximately. how many burg 3. Ap;roximately how many are 4. What o controlt e installation, City). Yes (Dade :County,) (If:yes, . `please include a copy) installed in your. jurisdiction? Total number: 7 000'-`'9,000 irectly connected into the notice` Total number: your,. ;definition` of a' false alarm?` SEE ATTACHED DRAFT ORDINANCE. epartment?, National Guard Armory) o you have any alarm classifications°other than false and actual sowhat are they? NONE b. 6. What was the total number of oolice responses to burglar alarms in 1977 or 197C? otal number: 9,040 (1978) 9,325 (1977) "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" 1909 K Street NW Suite 400. Washington DC 20006 Phone (202) 833.1460 Francis W. Sargent Chairman. of the Board Patrick V. Murphy President Dear LaW Enforcement Executive: The Police Executive Institute, in keeping with our continuous effort to respond to the needs of agencies participating in the Institute's activities, is interested in assessing on a very preliminary basis the extent of a pro- blem which has been brought to light in one of our courses: ''The Executive and the Patrol Function." With the recent increases in crime and the constant efforts to combat it, businesses and increasingly many residences, are turning to the utilization of burglar alarm systems to improve their security "and that of their opera- tions, assets, and possessions. These systems -range from the simplistic to the highly sophisticated depending on the user's needs, available equipment and related expenses.' While the increased use of burglar alarm systems has unquestionably improved the level of security, there is a cost, a cost borne by local police departments which must respond repeatedly to alarms activated by actual intrusions, system failures, or em2loyee errors. Costs to Police departments include not only the dollars and cents of responding, but also the diversion of decreased patrol resources for prolonged periods of time from other calls for service. At this tima, t-e Police Executive Institute is cphsiderino assisting in a. national study to determine the significance of, and reined es for, fake burglar alarms. The project will orobaoly be funded over ; four year period 5y' rthe. National Science Foundation on and will involve contributions from most of the', organizations: which have an interest in the problem, both in the public -.-,and private sectors. A number of resource cities will participate in the ,initial effort°tc collect comprehensive alarm data, and ocssibly later, to inoleMent and assess the remedial measures developed during the study. At this point, knowing your interest in improving police services "and in ;the more productile use of available resources, I solicit your cooperation to,the extent of sharinq your burglar alarm experience and the extent,ofthe,.falsing alarm problem with.us and indicating your possible willinoress to_rarticioate in the study as-a,resource city. I need your assistance in:collectin^, `some raw figures nn the scope of the problem and in delineating tie.issues which must be addressed. I have Enclosed the following,: o A concept paner discussing the nronosed research...eff ort indicating. the general outline, of the aperoach A , POLICE EXECUTIVE INSTITUTE ALARM DATA SURVEY M.• Please respond to the following questions with an estimated number. Exact figures are not necessary. Please confine your answers to either 1977 or 1973. If any questions are not applicable or a number is impossible to calculate, please so state with "N/A" or "Unavailable." :lame of Police Executive: ?lame of Police Agency: Address: Telephone • !lumber: Mame of persori completing Year of • 1. R. BOEMLER ouestionn data: 1977 1. Does your city/county/state have ordinances or codes to control the installation, maintenance, or operation of burglar alarm systems? Ilo (City) Yes (Dade County) (If yes, DleaSe include a copy) 2. Approximately how many burglar alarms are installed in your jurisdiction? • Total rtimber: 7,0()0 9,000 KENNETH I. HARMS CITY OF MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT 400 N. W. 2nd Avenue •. Miami, Florida 33128 (305) 579-6565 3. Appro)ciFiatelY how many are directly connected into the n,olice department,? 5. Do you have any alarm classifications other than c.false" and nactual..? If so, what are they? . . . 6. 1.1hat was the total number-of,polite. responses to burglar alarms in1977:or 197C? • • . Totalnumber: 19,040 (1978) • - . 19 .3?5 (1977) 14. f'.officers responding to an alarm? Average number: 2.7 (estimated) 15. What is the estimated average length of time that the first responding unit spent at the scene of "afalse alarm? 8. :that percentage of�1 ,e alarm were classified as �'se? Falsing1 oercentagei98%'�� 99%_ What was , the estimated total number of .addresses responded ` to? 574 x 5.205 ` Total number: 2 0 98.e 9. How many`;: of these addresses (approximately) were responded ` to 1 Total number: 344 one address? 6 E (1977) Total number: 266 66 x 5.205 10. What was the most responses made . 1st St.' was the second .highest number of one address? 117. N. E. 1st Ave. (1977) Total. number: 211 responses 11. What 12. What 13. What or.>more times? is the average hourly salary (excluding benefits) is the es -mated for patrol officers? Average .hourly sal ary.:.4 . 9 . o0 average number "of cars responthng to an alarm?.. Average number: 2.2 ('estimated) • Whatis the estimated. average number o Average time spent` , .12 .7 minutes (1978) Please return the completed by April 15,=,1979,:to: G. Patrick Gallagher Director Police Executive Institute;" 1909 K Street, N. 14, Suite 400 Washington, D. C. SIZE SAMPLE 3,712 (out of. 19,325 total) = 19.21% 3.0.minutes (1977) self -address envelope March Dear Law Enforcement 1909 K Street NW Suite 400 Washington DC 20006 Phone (202) 833-1460 Francis W. Sargent Chairman. of the Board Patrick V. Murphy President The Police Executive ' Institute,' in keeping with our continuous effort to respond to the. needs of agencies participating` in the Institute's activities, is interested in assessing; on a very,, preliminary basis the extent of a pro blem.which`has been -brought to light in one of our courses "The Executive and the Patrol Function." With the recent increases in crime and the constant efforts to combat it, businesses and increasingly, many residences, are turning to the utilization of burglar alarm systems toimprove.. their security and that of their,opera tions,yassets, and possessions. These systems range from the simnlisticto the highly sophisticated depending on the user's needs, available equipment: and related expenses. While the increased use of burglar alarm systems has unquestionably improved the level of security, there is a cost, a cost borne by local police departments which must respond repeatedly to alarmsactivated by actual intrusions, system failures, or employee errors. Costs to poltoe` departments include not only the dollars and cents of responding, but also the diversion of decreased patrol resources for prolonged pericds of time from ether calls for service. At this time, the Pclice Executive Institute is co1siderirto assisting in national study to determine the significance of, and reined es for, false burglar alarms. The project rill orobaoly be funded over 5 four yer period by the National Science Foundation and will involve contributions from most of the organizations which have an interest in the problem, both in the public and private vale sectors. A number of resource cities willparticipate in the ':initial effort to collect comprehensive alarm data, and ocssibiy later, to imolement and assess the reiredial measures developed during the study. At this point, knowing your interest in improving police services and in the more productive use of available resources, I solicit your cooperation to the extent of `sharing your buralar alarm experience and the extent of the fa?sing. alarm problem with us and .indicating your possible willingness to narticibate in the study as a resource city. I need your assistance in collecting some raw figures on the scooe of the problem andin delineatina the issues which must be addressed. I have Enclosed the foliotwwing: o A concept paver discussing: the nronosed research effort "SUPPORTIVE topic, indicating the ; general outline of the approach. DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" II 111111 111111111111.11111111111111111111111111111111P11 Law Enforcement Executive March 2, 1979 Page two A brief questionnaire of alarm related questions meant to give• us a quick`feel for the state of the problem in your .jurisdiction. (If raw data are not available; then feel free to make estimates - or merely state that a problem exists, and you would be interested .in research to develop a sound alarm systems management program.) The replies will demonstrate the need for such a study, and the apparent magnitude of the problem. In addition to returning the questionnaire, if you could furnish a cover letter commenting on the scope of the oroblem, the amount of resources used, and your interest in the research, I would be most grateful, and I feel in the long run, the profession would benefit. While expressing no firm commitment, if you feel that down the line your agency might be interested in participating as a resource city, please include that in your letter. Please address replies directly to me at the Police; Executive Institute. As usual, I am most appreciative of your: interest in this, as well as all our other activities The time you mighttake in .filling out the questionnaire and in writing the letter will be very worthwhile and I: will make the compilation of all the raw data available to you as soon as possible. Thanks for your cooperation. Sincerely, G. Patrick Gallagher Director Police Executive Institute: GPG:kr Enclosures Please return. G Patrick Gallagher Director. Police Executive Institute 1909 K Street,` N. W. Suite 400 Washington, D. C. 20006 , to the level. A NATIONAL BURGLAR ALARM MANAGEMENT STUDY The study is addressed to the issue: of false burglar alarms and development of means to manage the problem atthe local government Three general.' approaches are considered: (1) Control of Alarm Systems Technology. (2) Control of Installations Through Codes and Ordinances. (3) Selection of Police Response Models Appropriate to' Alarm Expectations. The study will proceed tfirougri 4 phases: �. Definition of what constitutes; a" "false": alarm and comprehensive data collection to define national experience accordingly. parallel with this effort an assessment of the state-of-the-art n alarm technology will be carried" out. (1 year) Analysis of alarm data and formulations of system management concepts for use at`'the local ",government level. The three conceptual areas considered above will ,be addressed (1year) Implementation of the management concepts in. selected "cities 1 year) e: Post -implementation data collection and analysis and refinement of the management guidelines The study product will ultimately be a'handbool. for use by local agencies for assessing their "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" alarm situation and formulating ; a suitable management plan for increasing the effectiveness of locally installed burglar alarms. The study will depend on the cooperation of a,groun of resource: cities `,tofirst collect alarm data: over a period of 1 year through :`investi- gative `_reoort of each alarm. It is anticipated that as many as a half million such reports will be collected. The cities:olus others will also be asked to use the drafthandbook to develop and implemernt alarm manage- ment systems in their cities and to collect data to measure the new system t• grantmay • this effort. effectiveness. Some. assistance be available for !11 [TiTi �, chit! ci Pace LLJJ Dear Law Enforcement Executive: it.414.4 Suitt 4O Veawtingior DC Phony: I%02i E's's 1460 Francis W. Sargent Chairman of the 5oa'C Patrick V. Musphy President In early.: March, the Police Executive Institute solicited the cooperation of police departments across the country in gathering information about,. burglar alarms. Specifically, we were interested in your experiences with burglar alarms and the false alarms they generate. Our questionnaire; was intended to collect raw data to be used in determining the scope of the problem and in identifying issues which should be addressed in future research efforts. I would like to thank you for your responses and relate;. some preliminary findings. Respondents nationwide indicate high faise alarm rates and most supported the need for. more in depth research into the problem. All responses from 82 completed questionnaires were tabulated,totaled,. and:averaoes calculated where appropriate. The range of answers (lowest and highest) was also noted. This was done to illustrate the extreme answers, rather than averages alone. This information can be found in Table I - Results of Questionnaire. Figures One through Five illustrate the responses for specific questions. The axis labeled "survey responses" indicates the number of respondents whose answers fell into the same grouping (i.e., total number of responses per category): Once again, on behalf of the Police Foundation, I would like to exteno my appreciation for your support. Should more specific information b desired, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, G. Patrick Gallagher Director; Police Executive Institute GPGnc enci. "SUPPORTIVE rr~i'r\f',,,i ...ram F LOW" S TABLE 1 RESULTS OF QUESTIONrNAIRES N = 82 RANGE highest 3` answers_ ordinance?.: Approximately; howmany twrgl ar''al arms are 'installed in"your'jurisd"iction? Approxin►ately:how many are directly connected to the police department? Percentage') • Total•ntieserX6 Number times?. assi fied as° dresses 5,000 1,E175 592 99.83 ` 99.7 99."1 0, 095 30000 052h •- 5,000• 2,786 720 ; CUMULATIVE TOTAL RE.PONS (TR) * TOTAL`*".. 37'-yes 43-no`. 222.397. lowest, 3 answers_ 10 150. 164., 9.. 10 AVERAGE 176.86 directly 'connected 10,595.67 pol "ice` responses 506% *Total number of respondents reslrowho nsesanswered tlre question. question.**Cumulative total o TR = 80 TR = 5. TR = 74 TR = 75 TR=1' "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" Mostresponses made`. to one address? Second highest number to one address? Patrol officers average hourly salary (excluding benefits)? Average.: number of cars responding to. an alarm?. • Aver age number of an al arm? Average length o of a false alarm? TABLE •1 CONT'HHUED TR = 47 • CUMULATIVE TOTAL RESFOr1 TOTAL (TR) 1868` 10' E:.� �- ; ,.r "�� PATROL OFFICERS AVERAGE ` HOURLY SALARY FOLLQ :" 11 1 AVERAGELENGTH OF TIME THAT THE FIRST: RESPONDING UNIT SPENT AT THE SCENE OF A FALSE ALARM Figure 2 • } • 4 "SUPPORTIVF DO0U f'r; EN!_-L., FOLLO\A1» MOST RESPONSES MADE TO ONE ADDRESS Figure 3 0 90 92 94 96 98 "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENPF FOLLOW" Note: PERCENT PERCENTAGE OF ALARMS CLASSIFIED AS FALSE Ficure 4 ' Not included on histogram are five responses that were below 90% false. They were 78%, 80%, 85%, 37% and 87.5%. DO( . i ENTS I•~ t% T )Y111 0 Note.: 250 NUMBER OF ADDRESSES RESPONDED TO MORE THAN - Figure sure 5 Not included on histogram are five responses which were over 250 addresses. They were 169, 502, 72C, 2,780 and 5,000. Operation Analysis and February, 1976 -",,Sp-PPOR:71771(El LLO I, Research study was conducted during January, 1976 to ac- quire: statistical data on burglar alarms. The purpose was to determine the extent of of Miami Police Department. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" invalid calls to the City. forwarded to the .Complaint Room. to the Communications Operators as well as all Patrol Officers as `to the correct method of filling out the forms. The officers were told to call back in after handling the Along with the data requested,'a list was compiled those "locations where 'the'_alarm 'went off, more than ;once See Appendix A To.be completed on each call involving an alarm Date Time Zone Address Business Name Owner Name Owner. Address How long did it take owner to arrive on scene? Type of alarm (..;) Audible ( ) Silent Alarm owned by ( ) Business ( ) Alarm Compan Representative of Alarm Co.. 'on scene? Reason for Alarm: B&E Robbery Attempt' B&E Attempt Robbery Defective Alarm Employee Error Cause Unknown Other (Explain) suspect apprehended? Time onscene for P.D. s Emergency Number on building? ` ( ) Yes ( ) No 1 4 RESULTS Tables II thru XIII summarize the study. Table II shows that 37%.of the alartn calls are received on either Sunday 'or Monday. In an attempt to break this down fur- ther Table 'II adds. that >34% are received between the hours of 6 p.m. and midnight. Table IV displays the calls by zone and sector of occurrance. Tables thru VII`show how many police vehicles were on the scene in comparison "to the number of •owrters .and alarm companiesshowing up.. The causes for the calls are shown is Table VIII fortunately nothing was noted in 48% of the cases: Thee: amount of"time spent by the. Department on the scene is broken down in Table IX. Display -of emergency numbers i noted ;in Table, X. The alarm companies with the highest number : of. going off are shown in Table XI:•, Tables XII and XIII reflect the type and ownership; of the alarm. alarms Appendix A lists the name, address, owner, ;;and fre- quency 'for chronic, of fenders. There were 257 suc January accounting for some 780 calls or'62% ca11s: offenders all alarm or.inn\tt. 'SIR% DOCUMENT T FOLLOW!' UppORTNE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW 0001 ;- 0300 0301 0600 0601 - 0900 0901 1200.. 1201 1500 1501 1800 1801 2100 2101 2400 44 OE CALLS BY ZONE AND SECTOR TABLE IV «sI r3nr,--,,1- V: S ,' DOCU VIEN TS FOLLOW 1% Number of Units % of;Ca11s. 42% • 49: 7% 1 "SUPPORTIVE 100% OWNER ARRIVED 6 10 min. 3% 11: 15 min 3% 16 - 20 min. 2% 21.- 25 min. 1% 26 - 30"min.. 2% Over 30 min1% DOCUMENTS FOLLOW' j t‘Alff.. •.I .i_IJVY kisP1tESENTAT1VE -OP AI,ARM COMPANY ON SCENE TABLE V•IY Before,Polide Department- A`fter ,Police Department CAUSE F. O R "SUPPORTIVE 40 DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" 60% Breaking & Entering 1% Attempted B&E 1% Defective Alarm 26% Employee Error 22%`' Other 2% Unknown 48% 100% Less than 6 'minutes 32% 6 - 10 minutes 26% 11 15minutes 18% 16 -_`20 minutes 1O% 21 - 25 •i. ' 6a Telephone Numbers TABLE `R ALARM. COMPANIES TABLE XI Company ADT' Burns Marriott Wells`_Far-go Systems for Security. Wackenhut Coral? Way Allstate Rollins CESS Son i tr o 1` Metro; Security All Others % of Calls 14% 12% 12% 11%. In order to dete mine the '`feasibility of implementing direct line communications between the Complaint Center of, the Miami Police Department and the Marriott Security System. information. was gathered asreflectedin annex one. - The number of calls received by the complaint, center concerning .ringing alarms and the disposition of these calls reflects the fol- lowing: 1,100 calls during the month of May, 1975. resulted in fourteen actual burglaries. One thousand and eighty-six of these calls were false alarms. This represents ,.01%`of the calls where alarms were ringing actually resulting in a burglary. On only nine occasions did a representative of the alarm or security company arrive on the scene of ,the ringing alarm before the arrival of a police unit. On 827 out of 1,100 calls, the security company did not respond at all; while on 265 occasions a representative arrived after the police were on the 'scene. As the foregoing figures reflect the amount of patrol time lost while checking out alarms is grossly disproportionate to the results, fourteen good calls out of 1,100. An average of eleven minutes per call reflects a time investment of more than two hundred hours during one month. As a result of this research, I cannot recommend the installation of a direct line for Marriott, as calls either directly from this company or from other sources concerning Marriott alarms ringing totaled 173 during May with one resulting in an actual offense. The breakdown for each of forty-two companies reflected in the survey for May is included in annex. one and indicates that legislation penalizinc companies for excessive false alarms is desirable. Installation: of direct lines for any security company'is definitely not recommended, as theproportion of actual offenses brought to our attentior by the various security companies is minimal.. A city ordinance penalizing security companies whose alarms ring causing police to be summoned on.afalse alarm more than once in a six month period, is strongly recommended. A proposed ordinance is "SUPPORTIVE TIVES D�DWIENT D ». FOLLOW iiNI iIIIII COMPANY Auto-J1arm American. Sec. United Security, Answer Alarm *rld Wide Security Systems Sony Alarm ight and ; Sound lectrc CO. CALLED P.D. CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON QRU BREAK NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D. SCENE 0 265 1 1 0 TOTAL CALLS 827 1,086 14 1,100 "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW" COMPANY Stevenson AAA Security Amer Protection - Westinghouse llstate. Inter American`: Rollins Patrol •arm Security' Int'l Security SecurityEngineer Alex Security 1 0 0 0 1 0 Dice Security 0 0 CO. CALLED CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON QRU BREAK TOTAL CALLS P.D. NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D. SCENE "SUPPORTIVE 000UMENTS 12 12 0 12 9 2 1 1 1 .COMPANY. Wackenhut .,ells Fargo Systems for Security -Delta noneywe11 Southern Answer Rite Answer Service -Coral Way Century:. CO..CALLED P.D. CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON QRU NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D SCENE 21 75 101' BREAK TOTAL CALLS 78 • 137 173 76 5 3 78 3 31. 29 22 20 12 16 18 16 16 0 16 .. ern. or MIAMI. PLORIDA lNTER•OFFICE _ MEMORANDUM to, BERNARD L. GARMIRE Chief ,:of .Police. Through Channels nIoM* Lt •• , Paul L. Oboz'. Complaint Room Supervisor ot suU. ECT, False Burglar ' and Hold-up REFERENCESMemo from ,.Officer W. Thorp CNCLOSURESs List of .alarms by business frequency .From January thru July 1969, the City of Miami Police Department handled 2,991 false burglar & hold-up 'alarm calls. For each call, one two man unit or two oneman units were sent. In those cases where the business was a large one, a total of four or five units may have been needed to properly cover the scene. Due to the large number of such calls, I recorded only those businesses which put in ,four or more alarms during the seven month period. They are listed by frequency of occurrance and alphabetically for easy reference Alarms an: It'isi interesting to,note that the 197 businesses recorde4t1 are responsible for 1,491 calls or 50% of he total number dispatched. A.D.T. is the most frequently used service. It is not unrealistic to assuue that many of these calls reflect extreem carelesness on the part of the leasee or a; deficiency.in alarm equipment. I -concur With Officer Thorp that a .departmental effort be made to reduce the number of such calls. A. letter from the Office of the Chief of Police to the parties concerned would have a .considerable impact in correcting the situation. On September 17, I will be a guest at the National Seminar on Security to be held at the -Dupont Plaza. Hotel. I will use, that opportunity to furthur our goal of a more meaningful alarm system in the city. "SU!a+1OR ! QGU,�" S FOLLOW" . • m+ +.�s�+:.wr. Fa4xn3xv�e+ CITY tie MIA/.U. • LORIOA Cl �„ INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM '' Bernard L. Garnire, Chief of Police Through: Channels Officer Dale W. Thorp, Plt. #4, K-9 DAYa 24 Aug 69 £NCLOIUNCS* ,ILg$ During a period of weeks, our officers answer burglar alarms at the same businesses, finding them to be false alarms. About 90% of our burglar or hold-up alarms turn out to be false Obviously response to this type of call exposes both the office and the public to unnecessary danger, and creates a false sense of security in the minds of our officers. Therefore, of logging more false to the top if the complaint room could institute a procedure all unfounded alarms, and upon receiving two or alarms within a period of one month, direct a letter official of such firm. In the letter we could point out some of the hazards and ramifications inherent in this type of a call. • '.I'm sure that this procedure for reducing false alarms heightens the possibility that a call is, in fact, notification of a robbery or a burglary, and the needed enthusiasm and caution ;in which an officer wi1..approach the scene will again return. "$U.PPORTIVE. DOCUMENTS FOLLOW,. I• • INDEX: NUMBER OF,';BUSINESSES WITH NUMBER OF ALARMS EACH - 4 OR MORE CALLS ALARM SERVICES RECORDED ON, C.R. CARDS AND THIS FREQUENCY BUSINESSES LISTED INDIVIDUALLY BY FREQUENCY OF. OCCURANCE AND ALPHABETICALLY. "SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS • FOLLOW PAGE 1 4 co • SURVEY OF BURGLAR AID HOLD UP ALARIYIS FOR', PERIOD OF. JANUARY THRU JULY 1959 vU PORTIVE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW' • 1xt.'l<giW_R_F:i^1i.'+"i!'w+?t�R,5_:?C�r�•,�'•liieel1 •• • • • 'NUMBER 0? BUSTITESSES WITH NUMBY,R OF ALARM . FROM EACH - 4 OR HOR} CALLS BUSINESSM CALLS BY EACH TOTAL 1 30 1 29 1. 26 ;3 21 1 20. 2 18 17 14, 12 11 10. % of total for above 197.'of 38 30 29 26 63 20 36 .68 1 14 84 99 ' 80 153 • 56 154 174 175 192 1$491 businesses:: 2,991 all businesses: 50% Alarm calls represent p 3.87/ of. all :called;`.: for services during the seven month period., excepting.traffic 0 ALARM SERVICES" RECORDED ON `C. R. CARDS AND THIER PREQULNCY Answerite Ans. Service Dade Commonwealth Bld. A-1 Answerphone Ans. Service 1627 Alton ;Rd.:..Ni.B. Answerphone Ans. Service 7929 N.E.• 1 Ave. Bode Ans., Service ' 7929 N.B. 1 Ave. Burns 'Alert AIarm 4530 N.J. 7 Ave. D?A Burglar Alarm -Co 14122 ` 27 Ave Dade County Maintenance Dept.. Dade County, Fla. Florida Security Systems 137 Aragon Ave. C.G. Gray Security Systems 2424 S. Dixie Household. Alarm Systems 2032 Scott, Hollywood Kerpz '.Burglar Co.. 5251 S.W.' 5 St. Pt. Lau 26 Miami Burglar Alarm Co. 20 2931 N.B. 2 Ave. Plaza Ans. Service f `"SUPPORTI'JE DOCUMENTS FOLLOW". :.A3 Systems For Security 1177 Brickell "Ave.: Systems The answering services, recorded are not alarm systems per se. They are . a means by which some .`alarm service notifles, the police. The multiple listing of alarm services by some 'businesses reflectseither the use . of ; all at.. one. time or the termination of one and the acquisition of. another during the seven month periods• c PORTIVE S�' DOCUMENTS T �T S W F0UL0 fr :). • 6 . ,. -IL.' 6 04..44i 4 016.164***************i* UROLtk AL '.43. 07-3E- " t "*IDTIVE-31:111STICS-::DR VAP1A3LE -IIi4E --------- ----- — 1- 0.00 ----TOTAL VALID 33.1/1")1.---113CISSt, * . 62.f)h ISSHG TOTAL v C)SEVATICit'S: ----‘1E1(X1 1-874-0 32? s v-A Q-T. c Or:0-6-59 D-0E-to = ERROR -- 3.R6957u 31..25b4 *-3--*-11,-*- 3 StIC1-7.V.F.-A-RE-i---***** `, • , • , . ' . .. - • '':1-\1.E. •-• t - t : t • ; • , , ,... • tr-N. 141\4111,6 C *I'jd.611/4)\14 I TO. FROM. Joseph R. Orassie City Manager Mitt! Kenneth Chief Of cll.'? OF tmAMI. FLORIDA .1:+;•1OI ANDU'4 .0E September 20, 19/9 FILE LEG 9-2 �;. Burglary and Robbery Alarm Ordinance 11F.F RENCES: Additional !:NcLosu 2r5: One please include the attached data as background material` the.= proposed. Burglary sand Robbery Alarm OrdinanCe The Source Printout has up-to-the-minutedata which available prior to agenda submission deadline..' cc:" Lac/ ;`Department = tEs4-r0 /64/ TO: FROM: CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA lNTER.OFFICE MEMORANDUM` Kenneth I. Harms Chief of Police (Thrpugh Channels). . R. Boe lm er Planning and Inspections FILE! LEG 9-2 suBACT: Recent Burglary & . Robbery. Alarm Statistics; Attached is a hand tally of an incident -by -incident printout of all original signal 25's entered into C.A.D. from 1-1-79 through 9-5-79`and 'projections to the .end of the year. Salient points are: 1 If the trends continue for. the ,next three months,. burglary alarms dispatchedwill equal approximately 23,912. This will be an increase of over 25% from 1978's total of 19,0.40 alarms. The false alarm rate has been revalidated as over 98%. This figure has remained relatively stable over the last three or four years. - Only 267 actual crimes were detected todate this. year. Of these, only 50 incidents resulted:. in 7.�` direct non -robbery arrests and 1 direct robbery arrest. During this same period, the Miami Police Department has made a total of: 370 adult robbery arrests'• 156 juvenile robbery arrests 401 adult burglary arrests 457 juvenile burglary arrests - The total of 76 burglar alarms initiated arrests listed on the attached sheet cost the City approximately $.208,000 in officers' time (not counting court testimony over- time, mileage` or administrative overhead) or $2,737 Per `arrest .which is certainly not cost effective from a police Departmentperspective. Officers.. should be! instructed .to change final signals to correspond `to actual events; arrival times are con- spicuously sparse. Kenneth I Harms September 18,21979 Lt. L...R..'Boemler Burglary/Robbery Alarm Statistics The Miami Police Department';s'Computer System Staff was_able:i produce this;763 page report in -a very timely manner within a few daysofthe request;.and`should be commended on their: per.-.: formance. This report .will, be.kept for future analysis, Veri.;, fication and rebuttal from alarm. industry interests. LRB:cw Attachments INCIDENT 11. 00137226 0173007D 0283132D 0313689D 04338456 1979 ARRESTS RESULTING FROM BURGLAR ALARMS ADDRESS 1037 N.W. 21 Terr.. 1300 Biscayne Blvd. 2300 N.W. 23 St. N.Miami &23St. : 125N.E.6St. � 0453103D 1832 N.W. 36 St. 0593001 D. 1331 'N.\b. 46 SAt. 0613061D .1200 S.W. 8 St. 0633752D 3875 Shipping 0653037 D 2975 S.W. 32 " Ave. 07731616 127-_N.E. 27 St. 07731726 .1237 N.'liliarni Ave. 0783240D 169 E. Flagler St. 0803098D 50 N.\V. 10 St. 0843113D. 4901 0853127D 511 N.E. 15 St. 0933850,6 1051 •N.\V..29*Terr.` 1023682D 1236 N. !Miami: Ave. 10436656 3841 > N.E.' 2 Ave. 1053003D 1500 N.W. °N River D 11331771),101,N E. 1_'"Ave. • 11630326 S1.E. Flagler St. 118334711);2201 N Miami `Ave. 13037746 2100 N. Miami Ave. 1333113D 2177 N.E.8.Ave. 1403148/3 1699 N 1W. 27' Ave.' 140317462200 N..W 12 Awe. 1493079D 1305.5.\V.,8.St.: 15730301207240 N E.4 ,Ct.; 1673580D 1200 N.W. 6 Ave. 16737996 1931 N.W.: 1 Ave. 17230021:7i3290 N.W 7 St. 17530276 4700" N.W. 12 Ave. 1753256D 300N.E.;50 St.' DATE -TIME 1/:1 /79-2216: 1/17-0011 1/28-0321 1/31 2205 2/12-2249 2/14-0333 2/28-0000 3/2.0204 3/4-2322 ,. 3/6-0105. 3/18=0358.. 3/18 0447,. 3/19-1022 3/21-0431 3/25-0310 3/26 0808. 4/3-2331 4/12-2136 • 4/14-2110 4/15-0008 4/23"-0906" 4/26-0.044 ..4/28-1237 5/10-2228 5/13 0308 '5/20=0422i. 5/20-0542 5/29-0318 6/6 0,142 6/16-1810 • 6/16-2312" 6/21-0001.: 6/24-0031 '6/24-1001 INCIDENT 41 1843077D 1893699D 1923026D 1943641 D 2013712D 2063010D 2133180D 2143563'D 2143704D 2163067D 2213322D 2243218D 2273084D 2383074D 2433010D 245379513 1 114:iL 1979.A . <ESTS h1 SULTING FROM 13URGLi :. ALARMS ADDRESS 4545 N.W. 7 St. " 3601 N.W. 17 Ave: 324 N.E. 13:St. 314N.W.1.2St. 1140 N. Miami Ave. 1200 N.W. 36 St. 801 N. Miami Ave. 1581 S.t. Brickell Ave. 3351 Matilda 3000 N.W. 12 :Ave. 3866 N.W. 7 St. 900 N.E. Biscayne Blvd.., 6505 N.E. 2 Ave. 950 N.W. 36 St. 6301 N.WWW. 7 Ave. 119 N.W. 2:St.' DATE -TIME 7/3-0235 7/8-2350 7/11-0059 7/13-1939 7/20-2239 7/25-0021 8/1-0948 8/2-1825 8/2-2142 8/4-0151 8/9-1254 8/1.2-1017'. 8/15-0241 8/26-0129 8/31-0018: �/2-2341" moiiiillE111111 III 0 41 X O IA Id O 4i W u 14 cv 8 r;. 114 41 • 04 >4 4.1 14 01 C4 at • •-• 0 141-4 " co in 1-1 Z 14 • • 4.1 PdU) .c 8 ' rf IT; H r • (.3 N H r • 41 44 0 > 14 114 ( TOTAL ALARMS INCOMING (ORIGINAL SIGNAL 25, ALL ENTERED INCIDENTS) TOTAL POLICE DISPATCHES TO ALARM SIGNALS = 85.24% . . . . (extrapoluated from sample data pages 500-600 where a unit has been entered and dispatched; not all "7" codes equal 01) 26 ACTUAL AND ATTEMPTED BURGLARIES* 14 MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY . FINAL SIGNALS CRIMINAL 27 LARCENIES FROM AUTO . . • • • • • 27 OTHER THEFTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • 28 VANDALISM . . . • .00 • •••• • 29 HOLD UP ROBBERIES . . . 32 ASSAULTS . . . -47 FIRE 49 EXPLOSION . . . . . . ...... . . • • TOTAL VALID ALARMS • . ,. • , , • , • , „ , FINAL SIGNALS NON -CRIMINAL.TO WHICHJZESPONSE'IS-MADB - - , 13 MISCELLANEOUS NON -CRIMINAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 38 SUSPICIOUS PERSON . . . . . . . . . • - • 25 OTHER FALSE ALARMS . . . . . . . • . • . • • . • • • • TOTAL INVALID ALARMS NON -DISPATCHED INCIDENTS FALSE ALARM RATE (15,978 t 16,245)=98.36% OF DISPATMED ALARMS _FALSE ALARM RATE (18,791 4 19,058) =98.60% of all RECEIVED ALARMS *IN 28 INSTANCES OFFICERS NEGLECTED TO CHANGE FINAL SIGNAL AFTER ANNOUNCING -COMPLETION OF CRIMINAL FIELD REPORTS. IN TWO INSTANCES OPERATOR OR MACHINE ERROR CAUSED FINAL SIGNAL TO BE INCORRECT. 19,058 16,245 11.0 88 56 5 2 267. 23 9 15 941 15,978 2,813 28,053 23,912 393 23,519 42 0 1 0 0 57 0 0 1 0 0 82 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 28 • 11. scaefracs Like other bureaucracies. police departments are saddled with many ills that are related to the bureaucratic struc- ture. Of these, the depersonalization of contact induces the greatest dysfunction insofar as police and community are concerned. For many people, the police station is a grim, fear -provoking (and unlikely) place to go for aid and assistance. Yet at the same time, and for the same people, it is their primary source of aid and assistance. Whereas a middle-class family might consult a psychotherapist 120 STOREFRONTS 121 over a serious domestic problem. a lower -middle-class family is more likely to present a similar case to the patrol- man who answers the disturbance call. Often, problems of welfare. social and health services, medical assistance, and the like come to the attention of the police before the appropriate social agency learns of their existence. Therefore. any device that increases the willingness of the citizen to see the police as part of the network of com- l.- Anity resource agencies is extremely desirable. New York's receptionist program has that value. The same department's storefront center experiments go even fur- ther, by making the police more accessible, and by oper- ating in an environment that will be more reassuring to the average citizen. The storefront center is an effort to decentralize the police presence. making the police more responsive to the local situation by allowing for an increase in citizen input and moving the police out of the central facility and further into the community. The primary objection to storefront centers has been the tendency to make them into public relations opera- tions. However, the success of the storefront will be pro- portional to the amount of resistance to this pressure. Of course there is nothing wrong with public relations efforts that help to increase the public's understanding of police effort and its sympathy for police problems, but they should remain incidental activities. The main func- tion of the facility is the improvement of police service and. to the extent possible, all municipal service. Well -run storefronts usually have a well -developed information -imparting and referral role. The initial prob- lems for a commander of such a facility involve familiar- izing people with its presence and persuading them that its main function is. indeed, service. • 122 POLICE -COMMUNITY RELATIONS The author (L.S.) had a storefront on 125th Street, manned by uniformed police officers, mostly during the hours between noon and 9:00 P.M. In all candor, it has to be recorded that this facility was organized primarily as a public relations device. But we soon discovered that we could provide unique services. We had frequent visits from people of the Harlem community who had problems that we could not handle but were able to refer to other city agencies. Subsequently, we developed informational programs for groups of students or adults. We opened our doors to such neighborhood groups as block associations for meetings. There were standing police exhibits, pri- marily from the Emergency Service division, and guest speakers from the detective division came to address the community on problems of robbery and burglary, assaults, and swindles. From time to time a trailer containing a nar- cotics exhibit was parked near the storefront to provide Information and literature on narcotics abuse. Inside the storefront we stocked literature on safety, job opporbmi- ties, educational opportunities, and the like. On the Lower East Side, the author (J.F.) instituted an unofficial storefront. We commenced operations with an Indoctrination of the uniformed personnel who were going to man the storefront. The speaker, a professional from a neighborhood social agency, not only discussed the social service philosophy but also gave an overview of the city resources available and the services they could provide. The facility quickly became a focal point in the neighbor- hood. Almost immediately young and old ventured in or peered in to see what the police were doing. Soon we re- ceived visits from people with information on gambling and narcotics activity. They were anxious to pass their knowledge on to the police, but they indicated that they were afraid to go to the police station for fear of being STOREFRONTS 123 labeled as informers. On another front. I recall particularly the woman who brought her two children in, announced that she was going to commit suicide, and requested the officer to please see that her mother got the kids. As these brief descriptions suggest, the storefront operations fulfilled valuable functions. We realized, how- ever, that the storefronts answered a deeper need in the community for police presence and identification. Both thyme qualities were diminished considerably when the radio car supplanted the patrolman on the post. The store- front is almost like the return of the foot patrolman. In fact, the Lower East Side program overcame some objec- tions within the department (from those who viewed storefronts as a fragmentation of police power and a drain on manpower for patrol and other services) by having the officer stand out on the street unless he was required for services inside. He became, in essence, a foot patrolman, but a sophisticated one, since he offered extra resources for community service. There can be no doubt of the desire of people to iden- tify the police as "their own." A management survey of New York's police facilities, noting the growing expense of maintaining and manning numerous separate precinct houses, and given the improvement in communications since many of the houses were built, recommended that a number of buildings be closed and the precincts be combined. As soon as this intent became known, a tre- mendous hue and cry arose in the communities, which strongly desired to maintain local police representation at least at the level that existed. In our view, the pressing need is not for increased centralization of service facilities. On the contrary. A logical extension of the storefront principle would be decentralization into storefront headquarters serving not +10%.4• r:.•,.. 41 -� .'.•-dr=i:�, -��j:�:. r.� _ •.�_ C' `r.:. �� ._<. `.�:"G,. i..fifi.. 1-ef .nLw.►-:• eg .. I Inn, 1 111111 NMI III 124 POLICE -COMMUNITY RELATIONS only the aforementioned purposes but having the auto- nomy and organizational flexibility to deal with many kinds of local problems. Such an innovation would go a long way toward answering the public's need for a community - oriented police. In any case, the storefront needs to be manned by wel- trained officers for whom the concept of service is not burdensome. In retrospect, we are not satisfied either with the training or the manner of selection of the officers who manned the storefronts. There was insufficient train- ing, and the officers were chosen and assigned to duty in a haphazard manner. Later storefronts developed a more sophisticated con- cept of their role in the community, implicitly based on the presumption that all policemen are community -rela- tions" officers. The storefront center maintained by the author (J.F.) on the Lower East Side of Manhattan was to have been jointly manned by police officers and social workers. The police were to be involved in an educational program at a graduate school of social work, for which they would get college credits. They were volunteers. selected on the basis of general ability, special skills, language facility, race, and ethnic origins, as well as a predisposition toward the broadest view of the natue of police work. A storefront of this sort points toward a community - oriented police that, having received from police superiors a general definition of the police problem in its area of responsibility, then refines the definition, together with the local community and on its own initiative. Such a unit im- plies the existence of a considerable amount of personal authority and accountability at the lower ranges of the police hierarchy, as well as ready civilian access to deci- sion -making at a level of policy that bears on their lives. STOREFRONTS 125 Contrary to what some might think, such plans for decentralization are favorably received by a number of police administrators. Good storefront programs exist in Dayton, Ohio, Holyoke, Massachusetts, St. Louis, Missouri, Los Angeles, California, and Louisville, Kentucky. These are experimental programs, and preliminary data are promising. As things stand now, the major stumbling block to increased decentralization, increased responsibility and accountability for the patrolman, and increased respon- siveness to community input is the debased position of the police in the eyes of the public. II Ir I"F1 f4ll� 19 wpm rrwri I 1IItr:ira cap