Property crimes, although not as reprehensible as crimes of violence, are yet significant wrongs. Theft injures its victims, and undermines civil society. One has no reason to be sympathetic to thieves. Individuals and society benefit from strong private property rights.
Whitewater, perhaps more than other towns nearby, has a problem with property crimes, including car break ins. Last night’s council meeting included a discussion of a police leadership plan to combat these crimes. Although the discussion was an honest acknowledgment of a growing problem, there are risks, too.
In general, Whitewater’s interim chief proposes a plan to distribute a Crime Prevention Security Notice checklist that field officers or community service officers would place on cars or at homes, alerting recipients to having left cars, for example, unlocked, valuable items visible, etc.
The idea’s not unique to Whitewater, and it’s not the idea but implementation and context that make all the difference. Of implementation, there’s risk of over-reach, over residents’ rights (even residents who foolishly leave their doors unlocked). It should give Whitewater’s Common Council pause that in the discussion whether to lock a car’s doors for a resident, the interim chief described the impediment to that approach as inadvertently locking the owner’s keys in his car.
The impediment isn’t accidentally locking a person’s car door, but failing to see that police forces have no legitimate right cause to enter a person’s property, without permission, and lock a door for him or her. It’s true that an officer might, in locking a car door, accidentally lock the keys inside, but that’s not the principal reason it’s a mistaken idea. The principal reason is that police officers — no matter how well-intentioned — are not the lawful managers of citizens’ private property.
Under Coan’s tenure, for its size Whitewater probably attracted more attention for mistakes, errors of judgment, and bad leadership decisions than any other city in the state. That’s not because of a blogger here or there; Whitewater’s bad publicity includes disastrous press in 2006, after the Star Packaging raid.
Ironic, about Coan — he likely prided himself on his public relation skills, but he had so little feel for ordinary life that he blundered time and again, drawing ridicule from Madison and Milwaukee reporters.
No matter how well-intentioned, these notices are a step that should include another one — one involving more foot patrols into neighbors, day in day out, simply to meet people, to walk through. (Not showy efforts like Coan’s ephemeral declaration that he was starting a foot patrol to save gas, but real and lasting efforts.)
Leaving these notices without closer contact with people (in person, noticeably, during the day) is a mistake; this force should discard Coan’s bad habit of not having leaders mix consistently with ordinary people.
There’s a misunderstanding of psychology in leaving a notice before building this level of contact with the broader community. It may seem like that level of contact is already present, but that’s not true; only those in the small echo chamber of this small town would think it were yet so.
That was Chief Coan’s problem, among others problems, in spades. He showed a poor feel for ordinary people, and led (such as he did) from a distance. There was so much talk about administration, about administrative layers, etc., but what this small city really needs is someone who’ll walk a beat with his or her officers, as part of routine duties. Coan would have considered, I’d guess, the very idea absurd.
He understood different theories of policing, but he jumbled them together in awkward, ineffective, self-serving ways. Community policing, such as he instituted it, was far from the real thing.
It’s a measure of how out-of-touch he was, and how mistaken his defenders were — that it would seem absurd to them. Unfortunately, there are civilian leaders in the municipal building who share that same outlook, and are no more adept at understanding ordinary people than Coan was.
It’s sworn officers, too, who have to execute daily, matter-of-fact contact with the public, in routine settings. Residents will always, and rightly, see sworn officers as the heart of a force; community service officers lack the same authority, and will never been seen in the same light (although they work well and diligently).
These checklists will be of greatest effectiveness in a community that embraces a different posture toward the public from Coan’s defensive, reactionary, distant, and dismissive one.
