State, local agencies can join against crime
Sunday's editorial.
Victims of crime deserve better than excuses from agencies that are supposed to protect the public
.
Blaming the next level of government is one of those excuses, even when the complaint is valid.
City leaders in Charlotte, dealing with high crime and a public that’s angry about it, can point fingers with the best of them. Their police officers keep “re-arresting repeat offenders for the same crimes,” City Manager Curt Walton noted recently, implying the criminal-justice system isn’t getting its job done. “Until there are increased options for prosecuting, incarcerating or at least monitoring the behavior of these targeted group of offenders, (police) efforts will be minimized.”
That’s a familiar refrain across North Carolina. Police and sheriff’s departments make plenty of arrests, but many suspects are released on low bonds or no bonds, only to commit more crimes. Or, when convicted, offenders are put on probation and in some cases scarcely monitored, giving them ample opportunities to continue their illegal activities.
Last week in Charlotte, however, the City Council accepted unusual responsibility. It pledged $4.8 million to strengthen the criminal-justice system locally. The money will provide additional staffing and technology in the District Attorney’s Office, 100 electronic-monitoring devices, crime-lab staffing and other improvements.
It’s a dramatic approach to commit city funds to supplement the budgets of state agencies, but Charlotte leaders think the expenditures will make local police efforts more effective.
Guilford County District Attorney Doug Henderson has watched Mecklenburg County developments, which he calls progressive, but he doesn’t expect a similar commitment here. Leaders in prosperous Charlotte have “more tax dollars at their disposal,” Henderson said.
There isn’t spare money in Greensboro or High Point, which are on track to approve lean, no-tax-increase budgets for next year. Yet leaders in Charlotte concluded, logically, that the impact of their law-enforcement dollars is minimized unless police work is supported up the line.
Is anyone listening in Raleigh?
Funding for probation and parole services has lagged for years, with the problem generally unnoticed until the highly publicized murder of UNC-Chapel Hill student body president Eve Carson in March. It turned out the two suspects were on probation but barely supervised. Now there are proposals that the state create a database that local agencies can use to learn the probation status of offenders in their communities. That very basic sharing of information could help police prevent crime and maybe save lives.
District attorneys across the state, including Henderson in Guilford County, have pushed Raleigh to provide more legal tools for fighting gangs. Henderson said his prosecutors ask the courts to take gang membership into account when passing sentences, although that’s not listed as an aggravating factor in sentencing guidelines. It should be. Unfortunately, gang legislation has become a “political football,” Henderson said, pitting those who favor tough punishment against those who prefer “education and avoidance of the problem altogether.” But there’s no reason why prevention programs and punishment both can’t be stressed.
State and local agencies dedicated to public safety must build the closest relationships. People who ought to work together often find themselves at cross purposes. Greensboro and High Point police gripe about lenient judges or magistrates letting dangerous criminal suspects walk free, but part of the reason lies with Guilford County commissioners who did nothing for years about overcrowded jails. Ordinary citizens who don’t feel safe in their homes don’t have patience for “it’s their job, not ours” explanations. They don’t want to hear that “the system” is fragmented and inefficient because, well, that’s just the way it is.
Guilford County’s jail problem is being addressed, finally, thanks to the May 6 approval of a construction bond. Voters understood that was a public safety issue. They should demand that their elected representatives at every level of government start to figure it out, too. The fight against crime must be comprehensive and cohesive, including prevention programs, law enforcement, prosecution, punishment, rehabilitation and follow-up
Passing the buck isn’t acceptable. Charlotte leaders saw gaps in the system and tried to fill them. Not every city can do the same, but every agency probably can do something. What’s stopping them?