(The other) morning I read an article on the New York Times. The article details how the city of Roseville, CA, implemented a program to keep safe and reduce crime. Nothing new there. However, the focus of the program is rather interesting. The police department trains waste management collectors to look for signs of crime and report them to the police. This serves as a preventive measure to reduce crime.
Many waste collection companies, including Waste Management, participate in the program. They allow police departments to train their workers on what to look for to prevent crime.
In addition to crime fighting, Roseville has seen other benefits. Because of the program, the city is safer and it has been able to save, “over the last two years in Roseville, the police department has left 10 positions unfilled. Having the garbage trucks on patrol may not take the place of a police car, but it helps.”
The article is not clear on how drastic the number of crimes has been reduced in Roseville and in over 96 municipalities where the program is operating nationwide. But the strategy makes sense. “It is a low-tech approach to surveillance, relying not on satellite cameras, space-age radiation detection devices or even neighborhood Webcams. In more and more towns, drivers and garbage collectors are helping the police keep up with what is happening on the streets.”
The program does not pay garbage collectors and the training is the same training provided to the Neighborhood Watch groups. The program trains garbage collectors to “observe and report” and do not intervene. Perhaps, this is something North Plainfield and Plainfield Police should consider as a crime prevention measure.
12 responses so far ↓
Barbara Habeeb // January 19, 2009 at 11:11 pm |
I like this idea. Maybe we should bring it up at the next NPCCR meeting where Police Chief Parenti and Detective Kuga will be discussing crime prevention.
Heather DeGeorge, co-editor // January 19, 2009 at 11:34 pm |
Wonderful. At least if they were providing more value than collecting the garbage it wouldn’t be so damn infuriating that they’re (well, Grand Sanitation is anyway) REGULARLY breaking the municipal law of not picking up before 6am in the residential neighborhoods… at least not with the traditional trucks.
Since nobody’s going to actually force them to stop breaking the laws themselves (despite COUNTLESS calls plus e-mails to various members of the administration) they ought to be earning the right to that kind of leniency.
Mark Williams // January 20, 2009 at 10:11 am |
I wonder if private collector vs public collector makes a difference? What I would really like to see happen is a major push for more Neightborhood Watch groups.
Norman E. Ortega // January 20, 2009 at 8:53 pm |
I have been reading about the programs. Most articles call them effective and it seems like they are propagating.
Ms. Habeeb, see if you can discuss safety of 22 crossings when you meet with Mr. Parenti. There have been two deaths in the same block this past year. We cannot afford another death crossing the highway. The highway is controlled by the DOT, the administration and police only have to request a study and subsequent safety of the intersections. It will not cost the borough anything.
Civil Rights // January 21, 2009 at 5:42 pm |
New Jersey Law requires a court authorized search warrant for someone’s garbage to be searched. We would never want to violate the rights of people, now would we. As a civic organization, we should protect the freedoms of all.
npadministrator // January 21, 2009 at 6:32 pm |
I don’t see anywhere in this thread that stated nor implied that garbage collectors should search people’s garbage. The fact that they are in our neighborhoods in the wee hours of the morning–when lots of criminal activity occurs–puts them in a good position to notice something that’s not right and call it in to the police as a “qualified lead” so-to-speak. That can be a window that’s broken that wasn’t broken when the garbage collector was there last week, etc. Or sudden activity at an odd hour where that collector knows there is never activity or the collector knows the house is vacant (which is more possible in a town where there is one company or the municipality collecting garbage).
Civil Rights // January 21, 2009 at 7:36 pm |
That sort of sounds like what Castro did in Cuba. Creating a civilian force of people to spy on their neighbors. Pretty scary stuff if you ask me. The garbage police will be watching your every move.
I think it might be better for people to be aware of their neighborhoods. Do like Mike Bloomberg says. “If you see something, say something.”
Expecting the hard working garbage man to be the eyes of the police while people living in the neighborhood can just look away is pathetic. Take some personal responsibility and stop looking for somebody else to do the right thing.
Heather DeGeorge, co-editor // January 21, 2009 at 7:50 pm |
It doesn’t matter how observant and/or willing to report strange activity residents may be: the vast majority of them are not awake or outside when the garbage collectors are–and that’s a peak time of criminal activity.
I find it hard to confuse this with Big Brother conspiracy theory vs. taking advantage of opportunities to keep the public safe.
When my grandmother lived in Staten Island she lived in a working community where kids lived at home beyond high school and people worked countless different shifts–day and night. Even my grandmother, who was a nurse, occasionally had odd hours.
As the fabric of her neighborhood changed to a higher level of working class where most of the residents had 9-5 jobs, so did the level of criminal activity. Now, nobody was coming or going at night to keep an eye on the neighborhood.
Since we live in neighborhoods where people are often sleeping in the wee hours of the morning, I don’t think it’s fair to think that this is a matter of resident irresponsibility vs. lack of opportunity. I understand your feeling that America does not stand up and take responsibility for things in general, but I’m sure you can find far better examples to support that position than this. Show me where the majority has opportunity and turns away to make that argument (which, btw, I completely agree with). This isn’t that.
Norman E. Ortega // January 21, 2009 at 8:05 pm |
“I wonder if private collector vs public collector makes a difference? ”
Good question. On all the articles I read, the programs focused on private companies employees. I dont know for public employees, though I guess it might depend on the Union and whether this additional task would be considered additional work, civic duty or something else.
Civil Rights // January 21, 2009 at 8:10 pm |
I find it odd that you claim that only the garbage men are out and about when the crime are being committed. I see the garbage men driving around town between 6 and 10 a.m. At this very time, I also see a whole lot of people warming their cars and driving off to work. Kids are going to school and family are dropping them off.
I would think that a majority of the crimes are happening between 9 p.m. and 3 a.m. I have never seen garbage men in North Plainfield at this time. I would also think that people would never stand to be awaken between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. by their garbage men.
I would again encourage all to keep an eye out for your fellow neighbor. We must also be very wary as to what would be enforced. If the garbage men were to do this, what should they report? Should we limit to property crimes or include all violations such as illegal housing violations. We are all aware that many poor immigrants are coming and going at these very late hours when crimes are happening. This is not to say that they are committing the crimes, but are often made the victim due to their work schedules. We can not have it both ways.
If we expect the garbage men to report odd activities, it might have a significantly negative impact on the immigrant community in North Plainfield. As the economy worsens, people will look to cast blame. The undocumented often make easy targets, just like they are targeted for crime. We can not pick or choose what is reported and acted upon. We must always be equal in our actions.
Heather DeGeorge, co-editor // January 21, 2009 at 11:17 pm |
First, I didn’t say that they were the only people out–but there are more of them out consistently.
I find it odd that so many people in this town focus on working around something that doesn’t work vs. fixing it.
And Grand Sanitation was AGAIN in my neighborhood from 4:50-5:23am this morning. Glad you don’t have to deal with it, but I (and my neighbors) do. To my knowledge, I am the only one that calls the police for this (per the police and the borough admin–who have followed up on it none-the-less). So because you don’t see it and you can’t imagine people would stand for it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. The apathy in this town is nothing short of absolutely pathetic.
Norman E. Ortega // January 22, 2009 at 10:32 pm |
If I am not mistaken, the article refers to private employees. Companies allow their employees to be trained as possible crime reporters.
I see no conflict of interests or possible violation of civil rights. Though the individual collector’s ideology may play a role. Nevertheless, the police will have the ultimate investigative word. North Plainfield police has been exemplary in that regard.