Letter to the Editor
Keep city safe
Published Tuesday, April 1, 2008
March 26, 2008
To the editor:
One morning while I was out walking, I noticed some personal items along the roadside. I picked them up as I walked, and when I returned home, I called the Fairbanks Police Department to report my findings because it seemed odd.
The dispatcher did not share my concern and basically blew me off, so I did my own detective work, and in a matter of a couple hours located the owner, who turned out to be someone living two blocks away. After meeting me and checking around his property, he realized that his home had been entered by a stranger in the middle of the night. My point is not to criticize the local police. My point is that calling the police is like calling for a fire truck or an ambulance, they only come out for emergencies. If you want your neighborhood, your street and your home to be safe, you have to make it safe. Be aware of what’s going on around you. Take note of who or what travels up and down your street. Wave at your neighbor when you’re both outside. An evening or afternoon stroll is both good for your cardiovascular system, and it establishes your presence in your neighborhood.
Also, to you marksmen who frequent the outdoor shooting area south of town, past Cushman, please use more than the usual care in that area.
I’m referring to more than just firearms safety here. Some of you might think a few seemingly random occurrences of mutilated domesticated cats is a gross nuisance, but it’s also a warning.
The difference between dispatching the four-legged beastie raiding your trash, and mutilation is a mental state. At best it’s someone with anger-management issues, at worst it’s someone with a sinister preoccupation with dead things. Please be safe, always take a few buddies with you, and make sure someone from home knows where you are and when you’re expected to return.
Fairbanks has recently been recognized as the second largest town in Alaska.
Let’s keep the Fairbanks North Star Borough the safest community in Alaska, by watching each other’s backs.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
"One morning while I was out walking, I noticed some personal items along the roadside."
Hooray for you! Too many people think that public safety is the exclusive job of the police, and they fail to see their own role. Neighborhoods are safer when there are more neighbors out walking: their very presence serves as a deterrent to potential wrongdoers, and misdeeds are more quickly spotted when they are out.
Of course, to count on a significant number of people walking, you need to have a neighborhood that's physically safe for pedestrians, attractive enough not to be avoided, rich with worthwhile destinations like parks, restaurants, and corner stores -- and fairly dense with people.
Standard suburban isolation (large lots) gives few opportunities for neighbors to provide that network of community policing. Let's make our neighborhoods safer by making them worth walking in again.
--Paul Adasiak
http://fairbankspedestrian.wordpress.com...
Excellent editorial!
Thanks very much for the story and the reminder - makes me feel like taking a walk :)
Good Job
Good job, I wish there were more people like you around.
Rhonda, I hope to have a neighbor like you when I get back home!
I totally agree with Rhonda's encouragemrnt to be an involved and participating neighbor.
But, in all fairness to the local police, I have had several occasions to call the police for non-emergencies, and they have always responded. Surely there are times when they are busy with greater priorities, but they do respond when they can.
No one seems concerned about finding mutilated cats??? Seems a little more worrisome than personal belongings on the side of the road. Maybe that's just me...
"The dispatcher did not share my concern and basically blew me off, so I did my own detective work, and in a matter of a couple hours located the owner..."
Typical of Fairbanks' finest. Has anyone actually had a home invasion/home robbery solved in this town? I know of several that have happened. I've never heard of one being solved (maybe they have been, I just haven't heard of one).
Sad really.
I think the author's point is correct - we need to watch our own stuff - the cops are too busy protecting us from those that don't use turn signals or have a license plate light out.
I AGREE WITH NEWSREADER 100%! GREAT ARTICLE, ALASKA NEEDS TO START IT'S OWN STATE MILITIA! KEEP US SAFE FROM POLITICIANS, POLICE, AND ANY OTHER CRIMINAL!
Three points, newsreader:
(1) Police protection must cover the many aspects of public safety. Some of us, if pulled over for slowly cruising through a stop sign, might think, "Shouldn't this cop be stopping a murder right now?" Yet, if all police were assigned to homicide, there'd be nobody left to ensure traffic safety. Many aspects are important. We can, first, hope the chief of police assigns his given staff appropriately; second, give our feedback if we believe he is routinely mismanaging the police; and, third, happily pay taxes to support a police force large enough to give us the protection we deserve. There's a fourth, too: Though we should be glad to pay police salaries and expenses, let's not assume that law enforcement rests solely in their hands. (See my point number 3.)
(2) When you ask, "Has anyone actually had a home invasion/home robbery solved in this town?" you seem to be suggesting through innuendo that the police -- at least those involved with burglary and property theft -- are not doing an adequate job. (Perhaps you're not, but it reads that way.) I have no opinion about whether they are or aren't. But it might be worth investigating what fraction of burglaries or home trespasses are solved *anywhere*, perhaps in communities of comparable size and geographic distribution, with similarly-sized police forces. I suggest asking a librarian at the Noel Wien or at the Rasmuson for help researching this question.
(3) Ms. Konicki's point was not that "we need to watch our own stuff". It was that that you and your neighbors are responsible for one another's physical and material safety, and that you can best meet that responsibility by being physically present on your street, "[watching] each other's backs." Public safety is a public duty, one we can best perform when we're outside our houses.
Speaking of the cats...I do not agree with target practice of animals. There is predator control as needed, and I whole heartedly agree with hunting for food. Anyone who shoots animals for "fun" has issues.
adasiak - You make good points. Thanks.
1) I think that I've been making the case on here for days that, in my opinion (and perhaps others), staff are not being assigned appropriately.
2) I have not done this research - perhaps you are correct. All I can say is what I already said, it seems to me that these types of crimes are not dealt with adequately in our town. Having never lived anywhere else (in adulthood), you are correct, I have no real basis for comparison.
3) Once again, you are correct, the central message here should be "watch each other's backs", not what I previously stated.
Its so nice to receive a proper, intelligent response to a post. Thanks.
There have been several comments, both here and on other articles, about how the police are allocating their resources. I wish to offer some insight that some may find enlightening. I don't wish to get into the middle of a firestorm (although I realize that just by posting here that is an unfortunate possibility), just to offer some factual information in the spirit of education. In the interest of full disclosure, I do work for the Alaska State Troopers, but the comments here are my own, written on my own time, and based on my own personal (12 years) experience. Sorry for the long post, but it's going to take some space to explain things.
Patrol officers of any department are the front line of public safety. They are trained and prepared to respond to a myriad of different emergencies, and are expected to gain control quickly when they arrive. Things they regularly respond to include domestic violence assaults, damage, injury, and fatal car crashes (with or without alcohol involved), bar fights, intoxicated subjects with guns, large juvenile parties involving alcohol (and often, shots fired), mentally disturbed individuals, many of whom are in possession of a firearm, intrusion alarms (bank, business, residential, etc.), fights between neighbors, etc. In the case of AST, we are expected to respond to all of these events and more from past Salcha, almost all of the North Pole area, all of Fox and Goldstream valley, most of the way up the Elliot Hwy., all of Chena Ridge/Chena Pump, and half way to Nenana; a tall order to be sure. As you can imagine, from both an officer safety and public service point of view, we need to keep a minimum number of troopers on duty at all times to respond to these incidents. These are not investigators looking into homicides, serious physical and sexual assaults, major drug violators, etc., these are the patrol troopers ready to respond at a moment's notice to a 911 call or other emergency. They are also, coincidentally, the ones the public sees the most of, day in and day out. Especially at night, when there are fewer cars overall on the road, so the ratio of troopers to "others" is much higher, but the overall number is largely the same (and because overall call volume is higher on weekends we try to weight the schedule in that direction.) The bottom line is, no matter how short handed a department gets, the patrol officers are the last to go, so to the public, they don't see the department being short handed. In reality, our investigative unit is less than half of what it should be; we don't even have a property crimes unit due to lack of manpower. This is why so many property crimes go unsolved. It's not for lack of effort, it's for lack of bodies to do the investigations.
More in the next post.
So the obvious answer is to take people off of patrol and put them into investigations so they can solve some of these crimes (home invasions, etc.) But I hope you can see why that jeopardizes both the other officers on patrol, and the public; there won't be enough officers left on patrol to respond to the emergencies when they happen, and they do happen. It is not unusual at all to have two simultaneous emergency calls that require a minimum of two officers each. Those officers have to be on patrol and ready to respond, especially at night when there are literally no other officers in the building.
So the next obvious answer is to have the patrol troopers investigate the crimes when they are not actively responding to calls. We try to do this as much as we can, but we run into two roadblocks. First, it is a very rare event indeed when a trooper on day or swing shift is not either responding to a call, or trying to get caught up on reports from calls he has already responded to. Because of the lack of available troops on those shifts, there simply is very little time to do follow up. As a result major cases (but not major enough to be referred to the few investigators we have) may take a long time to get finished up. The other road block involves troopers working the late shift. They do have a little more time for follow up once the call volume dies down, which is early in the morning. That, unfortunately, is the problem. It is really hard to investigate a burglary at 2:00am. How would you feel if a trooper came knocking on your door in the middle of the night and said "hi, your neighbor was burglarized yesterday afternoon. Did you happen to see anyone suspicious in the area?"
That being said, there are times that troopers on the late shift have no calls to respond to AT THAT MOMENT. That doesn't mean we can send them home. So, they are out there being proactive, which is what the public pays us to do. The alternative is to send them all back to post to drink coffee, because as I've explained, investigating crimes at that hour (especially when they weren't the one to take the initial report and know very little if anything about the case) is simply not practical. As a result, they are out trying to enhance public safety through being a visible deterrent by being on the road and making traffic stops. I know many of you find this frustrating, but I ask (without trying to be inflammatory) what would you have them do instead?
One more post, I promise
Also, there are times of the year when we are given federal grants to work overtime for seatbelt and DUI enforcement. Whether you agree with that principal or not (a debate I'm not willing to enter), the bottom line is it puts extra officers on the streets with no cost to the state. This is entirely how our DUI team is funded. If we turned down the funding in the case of the DUI team, we turn down "free" troopers. (I know they are not free, they are paid for by the federal government, which is paid for by all of us. I pay federal taxes too.) If we turn it down, the money will be spent in some other state, and won't be put into our economy.
One other thing I would like you to consider is call volume, which varies by hour of the day, day of the week, and season. While it may seem frustrating to see troopers who seem to have too much free time at one point when you couldn't get a response to your call at another point, keep in mind that we can't hire more troopers for the summer, and then put them in a closet when winter hits. Trust me, we feel the pain as much as you do when the call volume increases and it takes us longer than it should to get to your call.
Finally regarding the comments about being stopped for what many find to be ridiculous reasons. I have seen first hand, right here in Fairbanks, people get arrested for felony drug possession, felony DUI (third or more offense), outstanding felony warrants from this and other states, absconding from felony probation, soldiers being AWOL, accomplice to murder (that one was stopped for having no license plate light), and scads of others for simple equipment violations. Not trying to fan the fire, just offering first hand experience that these little stops sometimes DO turn into big busts. And had the officer not made that little stop, the criminal would have gotten away.
While I am not trying to enter into the debate as much as educate, I will certainly try to answer any questions anyone might have.
Thanks for the information Sgt. Goeden. Please continue the good work.
Thank you Sgt Goeden for the job you and your fellow officers do for the citizens of Fairbanks and all of Alaska.
I learned at any early age to never disagree or argue with a trooper. I will evidence that learning here by simple saying thanks for the information - it was informative. I'll definitely think about what you've said.
I also appreciate your tone - I know that mine is often not nearly so subdued or humble.
You guys have a rough job, no doubt about that.
Thank you, Sgt. Goeden. Many of us appreciate what you and your fellow Troopers do. It all boils down to lack of manpower...I for one will be contacting the Governor's office about funding DPS.
Keep up the good work!
newsreader,
Again, I find myself in agreement with you.
Sgt_Goeden,
Thank you for the explanation(s). I know you would prefer not to get into a long, drawn-out arguement and I very much appreciate your willingness to dispense information anyway. I also appreciate the informative manner in which you explained "Law Enforcement Options and Restrictions" from your own perspective in a non-confrontational manner.
ihave taught my six children not to trust the police. not to say there all bad. just some of them havent grown up yet.i have never needed the police for any situation. hope i never will- i dont trust rats.
Woah! I hope alaskamax is not calling the police "rats". Trust them, don't trust them, explain why you don't trust them, have irrational reasons for not trusting them, I really don't care. Just don't engage in name calling.
Sgt. Goeden, I too do not engage myself with troopers. I was on the unfortuante end of having two of them at my door a couple of years ago telling my girlfriend and I that her daughter had been killed in a traffic accident. They were professional, understanding, and compassionate. I know you have a difficult job. I have only had one "official" dealing with the AST and I was guilty as sin, and the trooper did her job. I was an idiot, and she took me to jail for the crime I committed, no more, no less. I also work with emergency management, and as such, I appreciate your job even more. You still may hear me saying that I think we have enough troopers and I still appreciate the days of when they would help someone that was "tipsy" get home if they were near home, and didnt arrest everyone that looked impaired. Best of luck to you.
Sgt Goeden: I would like to believe the fairy tale tragedy that you proclaim, but my experience has been quite the contrary and I find it hard to believe that it's just a coincidence or I am one of the small percentage that has been failed by "the finest". State what you like in the NM or elsewhere, the citizens of this area form their opinions largely on their personal contact with the police.
If you expect your department to be regarded favorably, I would suggest less in the terms of PR and more in the terms of actual one-on-one conduct. You can print whatever you like, but I prefer to think on my own, and in my own experience the local police forces are more interested in revenue bearing offenses than others, and this will inevitably put a sour taste in the mouths of those whom you are working so hard to protect.
Freezee, you certainly have your right to your opinion, and you are right, any agency gets its reputation from the way it treats people. I would only offer in response that fact (not opinion) that all revenues generated by the troopers in the form of fines from convictions, traffic tickets, etc. go into the state general fund, not to the department, so they do not raise any revenue from their activities. I can find the state statute that requires this if you would like.
Regarding personal conduct of individual troopers, if anyone feels that they have been treated inappropriately, I would ask that they please contact the supervisor of that shift and file a complaint. If a supervisor doesn't know that there is a problem, there is simply no way to address it.
The revenue goes to the state. The State Troopers are employed by the state. The more money I make for my boss, the more I am appreciated as an employee.
Regarding the inappropriate treatment statement, I do not refer to actual police misconduct, but to the way your officers interact with the public in general. DPS has enough time on their hands to staff an underage sting operation which generates revenue in the form of fines paid by the licensee and the individual. DUI convictions create revenue in all sorts of places, which is why people are being pulled over for failure to signal a turn at 2am. Solving crimes against personal property, however, generates no revenue for your boss. Crimes against personal property are rarely solved, but the blotter is chock full of DUIs every morning. It is hard not to form an unfavorable opinion about the motives of the DPS.
There used to be a time when Law Enforcement exercised the "Spirit of the Law", along with the "Letter of the Law".
Everyone knew everyone!
When was the last time you had to run out for your Ladies special needs,or medicine for your kid, early in the morning. YOU are a TARGET. If you are the only person on the road. A Trooper or City cop will fall in behind you and make every turn you do. Now you are nervous. Why? Because they have nothing else to do and the fact that you are out is suspicious. Do you get the picture.
Sgt's comments are legitimate, factual and organized. So much so as to scare most good citizens off the street.
I have read so many articles of most tips of late night arrests accounting to good merchants.
Lately I have read many articles about major thefts RE: Copper, Fuel Oil in Quantity, property theft and even home invasions, at night. Isn't this a sort of organized Crime.
Figure that if a Trooper makes a custodial stop. And makes an arrest. He is out of commission, or off of patrol to handle the paperwork and custody transfer. For, How Long? 2 or 3 hours. What if something really legitimate happened.
I personally believe that they deserve "Quality Pay". But, should Focus, and do their perceived job. Worry less about the little things and concentrate on the bigger ones. (But that's not state Law is it) That's who you were, be that again. Alaskans don't need more government, they need to be responsible for themselves and for their neighbors.
It looks like we have been invaded by Yuppies who cry about everything.
As a state employer in a job where I too get called every name in the book because of the job the state asks me to do (and I do it more for the people than for myself) all I can say is, walk a mile in their shoes. The may pull over someone at 2:00 a.m. that shouldn't be pulled over but when was the last time your job placed you in a situation wherein you could be shot/killed for just doing your job? Ok, so maybe their not perfect and yeah, I have my own issues with them but you know what, I think we're a heck of a sight better with them here then if they weren't. I know alot of you believe in "frontier justice" but you know, we have laws and people to enforce them because in some ways we are a civilized society. If we were to all walk around armed as some suggest, how would we be any better off than the streets of Detroit or New York? I love Fairbanks and I love Alaska and I don't think it would be the same place if we were all allowed to take the law into our own hands.
Freezee,
I'd rather they get the DUI and overlook the property crime any day. Thefts and burglaries rarely turn into people crimes; nobody is hurt. DUIs regularly kill people, over half of fatal accidents involve alcohol. If Sgt. Goeden works for the Department of Public SAFETY, I'd rather he worry about keeping people SAFE. It's not the Department of Public Property Protection, and if they have to choose what laws to enforce because they don't have enough people, then DUI is a great place to put resources. Just my 2 cents...
I remember something my Mother told me decades ago, "It's easy to say, 'It's his fault!' or 'It's her fault!' or 'It's their fault!' - 'It's NOT my fault!'
It's been at least 25 years since I was pulled over; it was the MPs down at Fort Greely and two of them hit their lights and sirens and pursued me for about half a block before I could pull over. Turns out I had made a "New York Stop" ("rolled through" an Intersection when I could have made a complete stop at a stop sign).
The fact that it was about 1400 Hours (2 PM in the afternoon) and the roads were nearly deserted was irrevelent. I was distracted by something that had happened at work and didn't realize I'd done it but I do believe I did.
The MPs were kind enough to issue me with a "verbal warning" and I was very careful to stop completely at all stop signs for a significant period of time thereafter. I was also prepared to accept (and pay for) a citation if they had decided to issue one.
Sometimes members of the law enforcement community do make mistakes (and sometimes the more honest of them will admit it when they do). Denying all wrong-doing and blaming everyone else doesn't change what is or what one's done. It also doesn't change one's obligation to obey the law and do what that is right (and to bear the consequences of their actions when they do something they shouldn't have done).
adasiak:
When comparing communities, remember that in Fairbanks, (this is only the city), population counts include FT. Wainwright. What the town fathers fail to mention all the time, is that this skews numbers in that it appears there are fewer city police to population than in other towns.
FPD doesn't patrol base--they have their own cops. Yes, military people come to town and are then under FPD or NP or AST auspices, but it is not a realistic accounting to include the base population as if all the military there are always under FPD's jurisdiction.
Sgt. Goeden's second post confirms a post I made under another discussion here about the police.
The retired AST investigators I spoke with said that it used to be two cops were assigned to a case. That way, more than one is familiar with the case; different shifts allow for no 2AM burglary investigative house calls, so potentially a higher solve rate; days off and time in out of town meetings (a common thing in my experiences) are more balanced because the likelihood of the two troopers having overlapping absences is lessened, therefore if something comes up in the case that needs to dealt with pronto, a cop familiar with and responsible for the case is available, rather than the familiar "You have to wait until the trooper handling your case is back;" and the public is better served.
Further, it doesn't really create more work. The case is shared.
Sgt. Goeden, the troopers, (and cops in general these days), do not seem concerned at all about community good will. This what some of us are talking about. They treat us with a condescending air, as if we have done something wrong--they are patronizing in the extreme. Frankly, with a few exceptions, I have been treated outright rudely by most of the troopers I have dealt with, and it has been plenty, and not because I was on the wrong side of the law.
And believe me. I have reported it. Not only to supervisors, but to my representatives. The cops should treat decent people decently. Just because one's kid ran away or got in trouble does not make necessarily make one a bad parent.
But that seems to be the troopers' assumption. If your kid does something, then the parent must be a: loser, druggie, alchy, uneducated, negligent, doesn't care, couch potato...fill in the blank.
That is how too many decent people are treated. Until the cops figure out common courtesy, I'll advocate no more money for them--period.
As far as all the folks who continue to use the tired old excuse about the danger and potential for getting shot on the job--give it up.
Nobody held a gun to the peoples' heads to force them to be cops. They chose the job. They are no more noble than most of the rest of us.