|
Building Bridges - Volume III, Number 4, 2004
Kalama Park Action Team Reclaims Park for Law-Abiding Residents
Community Prosecution in Maui, Hawaii
By Delores Heredia Ward and Jerrie Sheppard
Synergy results when like minded and determined people pool their resources, talents and skills to achieve a common vision. Such is the case at Kalama Park, Maui, Hawaii. This 36.5 acre oceanfront public park sports something for everyone: ball fields, tennis and basketball courts, a skateboard park and roller rink, picnic areas, playgrounds, and pavilions. This jewel of Kihei, Maui had also fallen into disrepair, scarred with graffiti and strewn with litter. Overgrown landscaping, the homeless and drug dealers had taken over. Even off-duty police could not avoid falling victim to crime, having been shot at during a celebration at the park.
Upon hearing of the complaints about the conditions at the park, Jerrie Sheppard, the local community prosecutor, called a community meeting. Residents shared their complaints, fears, and desire for a safer and cleaner park. Harnessing the community’s energy, Sheppard worked to establish the Kalama Park Action Team (KPAT) and a plan to reclaim the park for law-abiding uses. Rather than expecting Sheppard or other local officials to turn the park around for them, participants volunteered to take on the task and act upon Sheppard’s suggestions. Keeping focused and on task, Sheppard ended the 60-minute meeting with a participant-created action plan that included a massive clean-up effort. For her part, Sheppard would coordinate support from county officials.
Some community members volunteered labor; others provided sandwiches and drinks for workers. A construction company donated manpower and the use of a front loader, a backhoe, and a dump truck to haul away what would amount to six loads of 20-year-old dredgings piled 6 feet high and 20 feet long. This man-made hill had created a secluded area where drug activity took place; it’s now gone. During two KPAT clean-up events, volunteers, including the Girl Scouts, removed scores of bags of trash and brush. Even the fire department joined in, fishing shopping carts and other debris from the adjoining canal. A local grocery store has agreed to remove any additional shopping carts that may windup in the canal.
KPAT plans include repairing and reopening the skateboard park, which had become a haven for drug use and underage drinking, especially after dark. The seven-year old skateboard ramps were in desperate need of repair. In September, the skateboard park closed, but kids continued to use the unsafe ramps, gaining access through fencing damaged by vandals. Graffiti, vandalism, and trash caused further deterioration of the skateboard park.
Spearheading the effort to restore the skateboard park, Sheppard coordinated meetings with the Parks Department, County Risk Management, and the YMCA to clarify who has responsibility for maintaining and repairing the skateboard ramps. The Parks Department subsequently approved funding to obtain repair materials. KPAT and YMCA volunteers committed to help demolish, replace or repair and paint the ramps, while Parks agreed to repair the fencing surrounding the skateboard area. Skateboard park users are invited to participate in the effort through posted notices, newspaper articles and by Citizen’s Patrol members. The skateboard park is scheduled to reopen in December.
The first KPAT Citizen’s Patrol took place October 15 with about 40 residents, including police officers, the mayor and his wife. Participants donned KPAT Patrol t-shirts donated by a KPAT member and used flashlights donated by a local shopping plaza. A neighborhood businessperson volunteered to purchase walkie-talkies to assist the citizen’s patrol in communicating with each other while patrolling. Patrol gear is stored in a locker across the street from the park, in a tropical shopping area dotted with restaurants and vendor stalls. Patrol participants take notes and document their observations on forms created by Sheppard. The forms are secured with the gear at the end of each patrol. The next business day the property manager/locker owner faxes the reports to police, parks and the community prosecutor.
Community Police Officer Brad Hickle often schedules his work hours and volunteers during his off-duty hours to participate in the citizen’s patrols. Additionally, the local police now dedicate their crime reduction unit to follow-up on issues identified by the Citizen’s Patrol. The CRU officers indicate that since the citizen patrol began, Kalama Park is as quiet as they have ever seen it!
Previously, the parks department considered Kalama Park fully developed; there were no plans for improvements. With the public’s energy so apparent, the parks department is rethinking this position. In fact, the parks department is submitting a budget item to support construction of a peripheral trail or walkway as proposed by KPAT. Specifically, KPAT envisions a walkway with water fountains, benches, environmentally appropriate lighting — lighting which is non-light polluting and friendly to the near-shore critters such as turtles — and perhaps even workout stations to encourage additional law-abiding uses of the park.
KPAT has ambitious plans for Kalama Park in Kihei, Maui. Working closely with various county departments, the community prosecutor bridges the citizen-government gap so that Kalama Park can once again become a safe recreational haven for families to enjoy.
For information on Maui’s community prosecution initiative, e-mail Jerrie Sheppard at Jerrie.Sheppard@co.maui.hi.us or call (808) 270-7765.
Executive Summary
The Changing Nature of Prosecution: Community Prosecution vs. Traditional Prosecution Approaches1
By M. Elaine Nugent, Patricia Fanflik and Delene Bromirski
The advent of community prosecution raises a number of questions in the minds of prosecutors, policymakers, and academics. As it has been defined thus far, community prosecution is a proactive approach to addressing crime and quality-of-life issues that brings prosecutors together with residents to identify problems and solutions. But, is community prosecution different from traditional prosecution, and if so, how? Does community prosecution represent a philosophical change in prosecution?
The American Prosecutors Research Institute’s (APRI) Office of Research and Evaluation conducted a census of prosecutors in an attempt to bring greater clarity to the issue of community prosecution and its impact on the nature of prosecution. The census was designed to answer the larger questions of how community prosecution and traditional prosecution are different and whether community prosecution represents a philosophical change in prosecution by focusing on the following areas:
- Key elements of community prosecution
- Similarities and differences between offices that practice community prosecution and those that do not
- Perceptions about different prosecutorial roles and desired outcomes
The analyses of the census results shows that, based on offices that claim to practice community prosecution verses those that do not, there are statistical differences in the extent to which offices embrace certain key elements of community prosecution, variations in prosecutorial priorities, and differences in prosecutors’ responses to various crime and disorder problems. In particular, APRI found that the defining elements of community prosecution are the use of partnerships with a wide variety of government agencies and community-based groups; varied prevention, intervention, and enforcement methods, including problem-solving; and community involvement.
APRI also found that both community prosecutors and traditional prosecutors rank their roles in similar priority order. Both report that their primary role is to prosecute crime; punishing criminals, reducing crime, and preventing crime were also considered to be among the top priorities of the offices, although community prosecutors place a slightly greater emphasis on preventing crime. Both community and traditional prosecutors are in agreement about the ideal outcomes of their efforts, i.e., holding offenders accountable and ensuring public safety by reducing crime and preventing crime. However, community prosecutors use different strategies than traditional prosecutors to achieve these outcomes—namely partnerships, problem-solving, and community involvement. Overall, these findings suggest that community prosecution does differ from traditional prosecution in practice but that it does not necessarily represent a philosophical change.
National Community Prosecution
Technical Assistance Network
|
|
Now, more than ever, prosecutors, as leaders in public safety, are utilizing community prosecution strategies to assist in crime prevention, intervention and law enforcement efforts. APRI’s National Center for Community Prosecution (NCCP) exists for the sole purpose of providing technical assistance and training to prosecutors who are creating, maintaining, and sustaining community prosecution initiatives. NCCP technical assistance includes free publications and Web-based, telephonic, and in-person assistance by experienced former and current community prosecutors.
NCCP’s technical assistance network facilitates communication, creative problem solving, and information sharing between community prosecution practitioners and community prosecution experts. NCCP provides this service by maintaining a national data base of community prosecution programs, accessible through our Web site; facilitating an email discussion group: Ask the Experts; and by facilitating mentor relationships with national community prosecution leadership sites.
To see our listing of community prosecution programs go to www.ndaa-apri.org/apri/programs/community_pros/states.html. To join NCCP’s technical assistance network or update your program information, contact Delores Heredia Ward at communityprosecution@ndaa-apri.org or call 703-549-4253.
APRI’s Newest Senior Attorney
Thomas Cullen, a former assistant commonwealth’s attorney for the City of Alexandria, Virginia, is APRI’s new senior attorney in our Gun Violence Prosecution Program. He will also assist the National Center for Community Prosecution. Cullen brings a wealth of experience in community prosecution and prosecuting gangs and gun violence.
Community Prosecution Spreads to Lexington, Kentucky
After attending APRI’s community prosecution presentation at the National Advocacy Center last June, Fayette County Commonwealth’s Attorney Ray Larson began planning Kentucky’s first community prosecution program. NCCP Director Michael Kuykendall and senior community prosecution consultant James Hayden, whose NAC presentation inspired Larson, visited Lexington, KY, to assist Larson in presenting his plans to the community. Kuykendall and Hayden explained the basic tenets and strategies of community prosecution to an audience of over 100 citizens, prosecutors, police, and city council members. Larson laid out his plan to assign a dozen assistant prosecutors to different sections of the community. The program begins in January.
|
1This Executive Summary is based upon the Special Topics Series monograph of the same name. To order or download a copy of this and other community prosecution monographs go to http://www.ndaa-apri.org/publications/apri/community_prosecution.html
|
