HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CDTF-1997-1998 Community Drug Task Force
Steering Team
Alan Cohen Mayor of Ithaca
108 E. Green St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
274-6501
Katrina Turek Assistant Superintendent of Pupil Personnel Services
Ithaca City School District
400 Lake St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
274-2289, kturek@icsd.kl2.ny.us
Laurel Guy Coordinator, Community Drug Task Force
11 Level Green Road
Brooktondale,NY 14817
273-3646, 539-3070
Mr. John Rowley Judge,Ithaca Drug Treatment Court
118 E. Clinton St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
273-2263, 272-2102
Chuck Bartosch - Owner, larityConnect,member of the School Board
200 Pleasant Grove Road
Ithaca,NY 14850
257-8268,Chuck@clarityconnect.com
Sara Hess Youth Worker
Tompkins County Youth Bureau
320 W. State St.
Ithaca,NY 14850
274-5310, 272-6394, Sara_Hess@hsb.co.tompkins.ny.us
Michelle Murphy parent
34 Lee Road
Dryden,NY 13053
274-2173, 844-4471
CLynne Tylee Clinical Supervisor,Alpha House
211 Cliff St. S l
Ithaca, NY 14850
273-4191, 387-6118, 1mt21657@aol.com
Georgette King Coordinator,Ithaca Drug Treatment Court
Ithaca Drug Treatment Court
Center Ithaca, Suite 225A, Box 136
Ithaca, NY 14850
277-1455 gmk5@comell.edu
Tracy Farrell Common Council member
Chair,City Drug Task Force
429 W. Buffalo St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
272-4573
Rev. Cleveland Thornhill Minister, St. Jame's AME Zion Church
112 Cleveland Ave.
Ithaca, NY 14850
277-6274
Sharon Best Parent
246 Sapsucker Woods Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
257-4303, 751-3996, mcgruderl@juno.com ,
Mark Ashton Consultant 5 S ti Lf ^ °�
I -� k 11 c
655 Snyder Hill Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
272-9212
Walter Lalor Retired Professor,Ithaca College
450 N. Aurora St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
273-8828
Dianne Ferriss Parent
201 Second St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
272-6896
Jane Bryant Health Teacher, Boynton Middle School
1441 Northview Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
277-1268
Ron Schoneman Mental Health Subcommittee Liaison
320 W. State
Children's Unit
Ithaca, NY 14850
274-5318
Tim Marchell Director, Substance Abuse Clinic
University Health Services
10 Central Avenue
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
255-4782
Audrey Cooper Youth Worker,IHA Drug Elimination Grant
Cooperative Extension of Tompkins County
615 Willow Ave
Ithaca, NY 14850
Kit Kephart Education Coordinator
Alcoholism Council
201 E. Green
Ithaca, NY 14850
273-6288
Doug Green Minister,First Congregational Church
309 Highland Ave.
Ithaca, NY 14850
Michael Leary Asst. Director,Judicial Affairs
Judicial Affairs Office,East Tower
Ithaca College
Ithaca, NY 14850
Cassandra Nelson Youth Worker
GIAC
318 N. Albany
Ithaca, NY 14850
Mike vitucci
616 Cascadilla St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
277-3118 p
Sandy List Publisher,Ithaca Child �^ s
19 Cayuga St.
Trumansburg,NY 14886
387-5627
Marty Luster NYS Assemblyman
106 E. Courtrai s ice.- 1•�c < `'`�
Ithaca, NY 14850
277-8030
Phil Newby Ithaca City Police
120 E. Clinton St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
272-9973
Marcy Hudson Coordinator,Dept. of Community Services
Ithaca Housing Authority
798 S. Plain St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
273-8629 ext. 310
CORNELL UNIVERSITY
300 DAY HALL
ITHAcA, N.Y. 14833-2801
Office of the President
December 8, 1997
Ms. Barbara W. Thuesen, President
Ithaca Rotary Club
201 Hampton Road
Ithaca. NY 14850
Dear Barbara:
Thank you for your information on the effort to spread the word that drug
use is not acceptable in our community. I am pleased to endorse this statement
and note that several other service clubs in Tompkins County are cooperating
with you in promoting this important message.
On campus, we have several alcohol and drug awareness programs
aimed at faculty, staff, and students, including the "Drug IQ Network," which can
be accessed on the internet. In addition, we circulate information about federal
and state laws, Cornell policies, and the possible sanctions in the courts and
the campus judicial system. We also distribute a list of local and regional
programs and hot lines that provide assistance to individuals who experience
problems associated with drug and alcohol use.
Please know that we also have several experts on the faculty and staff
who might be of assistance to you. In particular, I want to mention Nanci Rose,
who is coordinator of our drug risk and reduction program in the Gannett Health
Center. She can be reached at 255-4782.
Good luck with your efforts to reach the entire community with your
important message.
Sincerely,
C4 �
Hunter R. Rawlings III
imaca uonege
300 Job Hall
Ithaca, NY 14850-7001
607-274-3111
ITHACA 607-274-1500(Fax)
Office of the President
January 12, 1998
Ms. Barbara W. Thuesen
President
Ithaca Rotary Club
201 Hampton Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
Dear Barbara:
I was very pleased to learn of the efforts of the Ithaca Service Clubs to eliminate
drug use in our community. Drug use is a serious problem that affects every
member of the community and seriously damages lives. I applaud your efforts
and look forward to hearing more about your specific plans.
The College has been and continues to be committed to eliminating drugs on our
campus. Our student affairs staff works especially hard in educating students
about the negative effects of drugs. When a drug offense occurs, we take it very
seriously and the students are referred judicially. The College supports the
federal guidelines prohibiting drug use of all employees and we notify employees
on an annual basis of our stance on drug use.
Ithaca College is very supportive of the Ithaca Service Clubs' anti-drug activities,
and looks forward to learning more of your plans. Thank you for including us in
your initial discussions.
Sincerely,
Peggy R. Williams
President
PRW/tho
Joe- ����
'leg'. dlr nl e�r�l lug l' t
&.Je 10 A4MAMW 4a
aru.�utc��eru.�ct.�vt�tom,•
el 4, &uA 41w�l.,r4Araj aa cl&,p w,&ra,4 6w 41,w a ache►edime
`�j.rA-,4a'o--,w--,,; / ,7r 4-A l W- j tl, otv--lx~',V,rar-�i
a�dou,�OQ.
� JcdG lay lel frrar� �r�src�e�9 a�rr�iiirti 1r 9 f jolev"Wroe 'd
`tea lorrrtruwwltixzle t1'�..��ar�,r�'f�'.,rrrt.��r,��rre��r� � iG'�rxc�C<.araC�ar�1.�tf'ae
6T�tJiYE ttstt�/�l BplL.9/I,!'/✓7�L` ��17e%'1:�r771%/,/�ILl.�IB✓r7.!.�ld>3 tlf?�/� .13,�e°-I�taL�rlf. Gt-l'�GOGGf�!Z�`
�G GPL�G.�lt�l3l�QII�IXt//�� �Pl/P•fS7/IZP./L�
� �tc�'rirealuutra,//u.:� .�1�.�srru.�`��.��.ez�ia�wee�a�c{ir�firf�t� �,�r►.rr.��'�rr.����°ia�
`att�tlLt�e. fv�t� /t]�e ��/'j}�p�rlrr�
VJ20r1t.P1! WIIWWAIVI,( '- � �f/l�/tt/� .rt moi- R./(/I�/l/�.�/ Kao;o,
5�w--It/' 1 �99�Y •J j j �iaccc/Yeut ` '
999j 98 R�cvev�.r � �isrc4ide�vl�
i
ino.Yid ��ru�
2� Y
OV luwe as
w,
iA �V%Ti
.
i Community Drug Task Force Steering Team
40
November 9, 1998
MINUTES
Present: Mayor Cohen, Laurel Guy, Sara Hess,Michele Murphy, Lynne Tylee,Georgette
King,Chuck Bartosch, Sharon Best, Mary Ann Knight Colbert,Tracy Farrell,
Rev. Cleveland Thornhill,Judge John Rowley.
1. Introductions
Laurel Guy,Drug Task Force Coordinator,spoke about her new role to guide the
implementation process of the goals and objectives recommended in the Interim Report of
the Community Drug Task Force. Her task,with the help of the Steering Team,is to
develop a strategic plan to turn these specific goals into concrete actions. In addition,she
developing a public awareness campaign to enhance these efforts. She emphasized that this
is a partnership effort with the Ithaca City School District,and that the Task Force needs to
continue work collaboratively with the school district and other groups in the community
already working on this issue. She asked the group to think about the following: 1)What
the overall goal of the Task Force?2)What is the timeline for achieving the specific goals?
3)How will success be measured?4)Who's at the table?We need to rebuild our Steering
Team into a working group that includes a cross section of organizations and people
representing our community.
2. Revisiting the Mission Statement/Establishing Action Plan
Mayor Cohen said that in addition to implementing the recommended goals,that our
mission is to raise community awareness,maintain visibility,create excitement in the
community about these issues. He also noted that the Interim Report is being revised and
will be released by the end of this calendar year. Sara Hess emphasized that people are
expecting the report, to not to let it fade away--the shorter,the better! People are looking
for something they can grasp.
Laurel Guy presented the Action Plan,emphasizing that these ideas are open to discussion
and revision.The Action Plan included the following elements:
• Establish a community coalition called CASA(Coalition Against Substance Abuse.)
This coalition would be a powerful vehicle to drive a public awareness campaign,
bringing together community organizations,churches,law enforcement,government,
social services, youth groups, medical groups, schools, businesses, who would in turn
encourage their members,employees, students to join this grassroots effort.The goal is
to create a comprehensive,community-wide approach to substance abuse related
problems. The acronym,CASA, refers to `one person, one family, one house at a
time.' Nearby, there are successful coalitions in Rochester, Buffalo and Syracuse that
we can work with. In addition, there is a national coalition,CADCA(Community Anti-
Drug Coalitions of America)that can provide assistance.
• Develop an Information Packet/Action Kit that would be distributed to people when
they join CASA.There is an incredible wealth of much needed information--
directories of local services and treatment providers,many educational booklets,etc.
The main problem is distribution.How do we get this information to the people who
need it?This `Action Kit' would become a key distribution channel.
• Create a CASA newsletter and web page that highlight local and regional events on
substance abuse issues in a monthly calendar, provide a directory of local and regional
services, and links to related state and national coalitions and organizations.
• Work in collaboration with other groups to sponsor special community events,
programs, workshops,presentations, discussion forums, networking opportunities,
brown bag lunches, performances.
• Contact national coalitions(i.e.The National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug
Information and others)that provide ad campaign materials that can be tailored to create
our own local public awareness campaign.There are many national campaigns that
provide extremely effective posters and ads for radio,TV,and newspapers.These
include Reality Check,Girl Power!,The Arts and Prevention,etc.
• Build a partnership with the local media and businesses to sponsor this campaign.
=> Newspaper,radio and TV ads.
=> Special in-depth newspaper series on substance abuse issues.
=> On-going Op-Ed columns.
Followup Letters to the Editor
Ongoing publicity for Drug Task Force/Community Coalition efforts and special
events.
• Build a resource library that includes educational videos that can be aired on the public
access channel.There are locally produced videos as well as national distributors that
have videos that can be used in the public domain. Create a regular program on the
public access channel that also includes panel discussions on various issues. (Channel
13 could use some good,quality programming!)
• Create opportunities for youth-led, youth-oriented initiatives and involvement.These
could include youth-produced ads and for local campaign,web page, cable show,
programs, events, conferences.
• Develop new ways of creating a stronger partnership with ICSD to support their efforts
in enhancing drug education for students and teachers.
• Research local,state,federal funding opportunities to support these ongoing efforts of
the Drug Task Force.
An interesting discussion followed! Here are some highlights:
Lynn Tylbee suggested developing a speakers bureau,motivational speakers who could
sell the idea of a community coalition by speaking to community groups.
Tracy Farrell asked about the `care and feeding' of such a coalition.Chuck Bartosch
wondered if CASA would then become a separate entity requiring a board,marketing,daily
phone service, staff and budget.
Georgette King wondered about what to do if CASA was in fact,successful? How geared
up are we locally for large numbers of people seeking help?Are treatment centers ready?
Lynn Tylbee responded that help is there for those who need it-- in-patient,mental health,
alcoholism council,treatement centers.
Sharon Best noted that the public perception is that there is no help.There is a large need
for family help. Also,not everybody has insurance.
Mary Ann Knight Colbert said that many youth do not have insurance and are not eligible
for Medicaid. We need to help people obtain insurance.
Sharon added that it's easy to look at the drug problem in the negative.We need an
approach where people can come and get positive help.
Rev.Thornhill said his feeling is that this is an underserved community. Some programs
are just a revolving door.Treatment is not working. On a positive note,he mentioned one
program in Spencer, the Youth Challenge program, that is effective. He strongly feels that
the important issue is treatment,effective treatment.
Lynne Tylbee reminded us that the raw statistic is that 80% of addicts will fail in treatment.
It is a difficult problem.
Georgette King said that whether or not they can navigate the system,families do not have
the information they need to go through the Medicaid gamut.The system fails to support
them. The network isn't there.
Lynne Tylbee asked is that where CASA can step in?
John Rowly felt that both Alpha House and the Alcoholism Council could use help in how
to be welcoming.
Rev. Thornhill again stated the need for treatment,especially for youth.
Sara Hess,speaking on behalf of youth workers, stated that everyone acknowledges that
there are not enough treatment centers for the younger population under the age of 18. She
also said that in terms of building a community coalition,to include the function of
networking --creating opportunities for exchanging information and working together on
funding issues -- to think about how to make the best use of the network.
John Rowley said he liked the idea of a coalition and has grant proposal material for
creating coalitions.
3. Reports on Status of Recommended Goals
We decided to wait until our next meeting,when Katrina Turek from ICSD could attend,to
go over the recommended goals outlined in the Interim Report
4. Re-evaluating Drug Task Force Committees
Youth Education and Parent Education are still working committees.Community, School
Culture— Policy, School Culture—Environment,Treatment,Justice System, and Survey
have finished their work in establishing the recommended goals in the Interim Report.
Public Outreach never got off the ground. Discussion centered on rebuilding the Steering
Team to become a working group to develop and implement the goals and action plan.
Suggestions for new working committees included a Grant Writing Committee,Media
Outreach Committee, and Research Committee(to compile information on creating
coalitions,collect and update information for the `Action Kit.'
5. Regular Meeting Time
We tentatively agreed to a regular meeting time of the second Monday of the month at 5:30
p.m. in the 2nd floor conference room of City Hall. (excluding December because of
Hanukkah!)
Save the date '.
Next Drug Task Force Steering Team Meeting:
Monday, January 11, 1999
5:30 p.m.
2nd floor Conference Room
City Hall
108 E. Green St.
i.
Ak
ie
4N
dt
'10
rwr
IF
JA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
First Selection Criterion
A. OBJECTIVE DATA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Profile of Ithaca, New York, and Ithaca Housing Authority. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
Education and Human Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
B. NATURE AND FREQUENCY OF DRVG-RELATED CRIME "IN OR AROVND"
HOVSING AUTHORITIES/DEVELOPMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
C. NUMBERS OF LEASE TERMINATIONS/EVICTIONS
FOR DRVG-RELATED CRIME. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
D. NUMBER OF LOCAL EMERGENCY ROOM ADMISSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
E. NVMBER OF POLICE CALLS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
F. NVMBER OF RESIDENTS IN TREATMENT AND AFTERCARE; NVMBER
SVCCESSFVLLY COMPLETING TREATMENT AND AFTERCARE PROGRAMS . . . 13
G. SURVEYS OF RESIDENTS AND STAFF, OTHER RESEARCH.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Ithaca Police Department Perception of Crime and Security in IHA
Developments.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
H. INTERVIEWS WITH RESIDENT LEADERS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Personal Safety.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Perception of Crime and Drugs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Perception of Disorder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Perception of Police Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17
Perception of Housing Authority's Performance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Most needed to improve resident safety and
security in I HA Developments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
I. COST OF VANDALISM.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
J. SCHOOL DROPOUT AND LEVEL OF SUSPENSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
K. SITUATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21
L. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A. OBJECTIVE DATA
In the following discussion we will describe the Ithaca Housing Authority and the
problems confronted by the City of Ithaca in addressing crime issues in a university-
dominated community. The transient nature of the student bodies at Comell
University and Ithaca College poses unique and interesting dynamics for both the
City and the Housing Authority. We will describe this context to a limited extent when
we focus on the large number of disturbance and alcohol related calls to the police.
What we cannot readily describe in the objective data is the demand for drugs and
controlled substances that emanates from the college campuses. Both faculty and
students often seek out supplies of marijuana and harder drugs for their own use
within the community. Traditionally, the supply role has been played out in the
context of the public housing community. Because little attention was traditionally
focused on crime and drugs in the public housing setting, it was common knowledge
that you went to Northside or Southview to get your "party" materials. Both those
who sought to buy and those who sought to sell came to public housing in Ithaca
because that was the reputation the communities had.
We have worked hard to change that. As you will see in the following discussions,
we have moved swiftly to evict families who have been either selling or permitted
S'
�—' ver o
z z
F
0 -07
t preen St
y on
rater
-/Y
Y �
A I T SIE
;r
ad
' pu blit housing
%has
7
drugs to be sold in or near their units. We have also evicted families for repeated use
of controlled substances. This has clearly sent a message to the rest of the public
housing residents that IHA will not tolerate any sort of drug related activities by our
residents.
The message is getting to the outsiders as well. We have prosecuted several
hundred persons for trespassing on our properties over the last two years. The
police, our residents and our staff are diligent in challenging newcomers to the
property. Cars that do not have parking permits are towed almost immediately after
they have been identified. The residents enforce this policy most avidly because
they do not want to see the communities return to the conditions of several years
ago.
While we have made headway, we have a long way to go. As you will see below,
crime rates per 1000 population are still 3 to 4 times greater in and around our public
housing developments than in the city as a whole. Much of this is because the drug
trade has merely moved to the periphery of the housing developments, rather than to
have been eradicated completely. This cannot be tolerated. Public housing and the
surrounding streets should be as safe as any other area in the community. This is
the goal of this proposal: We seek to return public housing and its adjacent
neighborhoods to the crime-free status of any other multi-family community in
Ithaca. Our strategy, as you will see in the discussion of the next criteria, is to deal
with "drug elimination"as a neighborhood problem, not just a public housing problem.
Profile of phaca,New York'and Ithaca Housing Authority
The city of Ithaca is situated on the southern end of Cayuga Lake in central New
York State's Finger Lakes region. The area is characterized by rolling farmlands,
forested hills and deep-stream gorges with spectacular waterfalls. Ithaca's climate is
temperate with brisk winters. Despite its distant location relative to interstate
highways, the city is well connected with numerous all-weather highways, a regional
airport, and both municipal and long distance bus service. Ithaca is primarily an
education center where two higher learning institutions--Comell University and
Ithaca College are the number one and number two employers respectively. Ithaca's
largest economic sector is service and education, employing 39 out of every 100
residents. Wholesaling and retailing is another significant economic field, employing
33 percent of the working population. Economically the area is quite viable and
boasts one of the lowest unemployment rates in New York State-3.2%.
'AN figures are from Caritas Inc.,Cornell University,Ithaca College,Itliaca Mousing Autliority,Tompkins Cortland Community
College,Tompkins County Budget and Finance and the chamber of Commerce or Convention&Visitors Bureau and are used by
special permission-all data is 1995/6,unless rated otherwise.Last modified 10J OM.
Population of Ithaca and IHA
' Tompkins County 96,659
City of Ithaca 28,937
Ithaca Housing Authority 605
Percent of Population 2.3%
Northside 233
Southview 72
Overlook 29
Titus I & II 247
•Population Characteristics of Ithaca and IHA
The population of Ithaca is 28,937 representing nearly 30%of the entire population of
Tompkins County. The population of the residents under the jurisdiction of the Ithaca
Housing Authority is 605, or just over 2% of the population of the city of Ithaca and
less than 1% of the population of Tompkins County. The Ithaca Housing Authority is
comprised of developments at four locations. Throughout this section, these
locations will be referred to as Northside, Southview, Overlook, and Titus I & II.
Ethnic Breakdown for City of Ithaca Ethnic Breakdown (by family)for
Total %of Total IHA
White 84,240 87.2 Total %of Total
Asian & Pacific Islander 6,311 6.5 White 38 40.0
Black 3,238 3.3 Asian & Pacific Islander13 13.7
Hispanic 2,471 2.6 Black 28 29.5
Other Race 148 2.0 Hispanic 10 9.5
Total 96,659 Other Race 8 8.5
Total Residents 605
•Ethnic Breakdown of Families for Ithaca and IHA
Ethnically, Ithaca is predominantly White. The second largest ethnic group is that of
Asians and Pacific Islanders followed by Blacks and then Hispanics. As in the city,
the largest ethnic group of residents in IHA developments is White. However, there
is a higher proportion of Blacks, Asians, and Hispanics living in IHA developments
than in the general population.
INCOME LEVEL and TAXATION
Tompkins County& Ithaca (1995)
Per cap. Personal income, incl. students .......... ................................ $ 16,241
Average household income ................................................................. 44,278
Median household income ....................................................................31,412
Family income of IHA resident.....................................................90%earn less than $4,000
Ithaca City Tax rate Property tax..................................(per$1,000 of value[19951 is 13.68%
Sales tax in the city is 8% 4% state, 4%city and local
•Income Characteristics of Ithaca and IHA Residents
Education and Human Services
Child Care
Tompkins County has 16 child care centers providing a variety of care for infants
to school age children.Three are chamber members.
Primary and Secondary Schools
Tompkins County has six school districts, one regional vocational school
(BOCES),one parochial school and five private schools.
Health Care
Tompkins County has one 204-bed acute care facility, Cayuga Medical Center at
Ithaca. The medical center provides both outpatient and inpatient care and is the
sole provider of emergency medical care for the area. Its 160-member medical
staff offers the full range of medical and surgical specialties as well as primary
care. Tompkins County has four nursing home facilities, one hospice care facility
and several home health care organizations.
B. NATURE AND FREQUENCY OF DRUG-RELATED CRIME`1N OR AROUND"HOUSING
AUTHORMESJDEVELOPMENTS
s
ver o
Z z
n
0
or Green St
Offenses
7 De�aa: P•tiw t �
Y
i nier >
r
J
J/!
Y '
1 the T
fphrichovvivs X
ekes
•Drug Arrests in Ithaca, 1994-1997
As shown in above map, drug arrests have occurred in and around the two family
developments more frequently than around the senior citizen facility or the small
family development northwest of town.
This concentration of drug arrests is more dramatically depicted in the following
tables:
Arrests by T e of Arrest Location and Ratio of Arrests in Public Housin
LL
J V! VlW G v► J
W Z
V) W d J Q Z W Ce V) = J
Q Q G VJ C7 O O V m O F' k7 O O Q
W at Z 0 cc m F- 0 = U h-
VI W Ce 0 Q OL Q O m cc O
Q in 0Q ... oc a 0 o c �
NORTHSIDE 7 11 0 10 11 1 0 221 11 1 5 5 24 2 2 82
SOUTHVIEW 2 0 0 1 2 0 2 81 0 1 3 9 2 0 2 32
OVERLOOK 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 3
TITUS ILII 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 7
ITHACA 97 9 0 75 27 46 0 288 13 3 23 157 220 13 24 995
Number of Arresft 107 10 0 87 31 48 3 318 14 5 31 174 247 151 2911119
Public Housing As:
PementofAmests 9% 10% NA 114%113%14%1100%19%17%140%126%110%111%113%117%111
Ratio to Populadon 1 4.11 4.3 NA 1 6.01 5.611.81 43.514.113.1117.4111.21 4.21 4.81 5.81 7.51 4.8
Note: Public Housing represents 2.3%of the population of ft Cfly of Owe. Nearly 40%of the population
lives in Tflus Towers 1&1f.
0 Arrests by Type, Location, and Ratio of Arrests to Population
This figure shows the total number of arrests by the type of arrest. The data is
slightly misleading because it counts arrests within a block of the public housing site
as having occurred within the boundaries that we were interested in looking at.
These areas are shown on the preceding map showing drug arrests. Still the data
presents a good barometer of what is occurring in public housing in Ithaca. First, one
should note that public housing represents only 2.3% of the population living in
Ithaca, but it accounts for 10% of all drug arrests during this period and 13% of all
weapons offenses. It accounts for all of the arson charges and 40 percent of the
auto theft charges. Overall, arrest rates are 4.8 times greater than the expected rate
based on chance.
CRIME RATES PER 1000 POPULATION BY AREA
OFFENSESH rn
G J
J y Q J 6 Le C O
AREA W X Coe i QomQ, W coo
LU
O y a v O
Q (A F� m 1J a :52 O O O ►�
NORTHSIDE 30 4 0 431 4 4 0 94 4 4 21 21 103 9 9 352
SOUTI-M 28 0 0 14 28 0 2B 111 0 14 42 125 28 0 28 444
OVERI-00 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69 0 0 0 103
TITUS 18,11 4 0 0 0 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 4 4 0 4 28
rMA 3 0 0 3 1 2 0 10 0 0 1 5 7 0 1 34
Source: Ithaca Police Department,Arrests for 1994-1997
e Crime rates per 1000 population based on arrests
The following figure shows that the rates per 1000 population are highest in
Southview and Northside. Titus I & II have arrest rates below that for the city with
Arrest Rate for All Offenses
900
em
700
e 600
� t
gd 500
R �
`e 400
n
3M
200
100x
CITV Or M ACA NORT11SIDE OVERLOOK SOUTIMEW Taus
0 Arrest rates by development and city for 1993-1997
only 28 arrests population from 1994 through July 1, 1997. The Titus Towers
neighborhood had been high crime area previously. The adjacent Parkside Garden
Apartments looked very much like Southview and Northside in terms of crime. The
strategies here employed seem to be effective in reducing drug-related crime in the
Titus Towers neighborhood. The crime rates in Southview were 444 arrests per
1000 population, or 13 times greater than the rate for the city.
Northside also had a rate of 352 arrests per 1000 population, or about 10 times more
than the city's rate. Overlook illustrates the caution that we must take in interpreting
this data. The rate in Overlook is higher than the actual number of arrests in the
development because of the "in or around" search we imposed on the data. There
were four arrests at one unit in the Hector Street area during this period.
The overall arrest rates are shown in the following tables. Here the crime rates are
for all arrests and not just for the selected ones listed in the tables.
Crime Rates by Area
110
120
100
so
60
■NORTHSIDE
O SOUi}MEW
40 oOVERLOOK
■TrrUS I&II
r
20 x4 ` anHACA
0
�f
UJ
�V
J
En,1Q�(,,
'- U m = 7 Q Z p ��A
M
> a m o o a oz R%/0"t k
0
a � a
0
°Arrests by development for all types of crime
Crime Rates for All Arrests
5
o c LU
LL rn O >
o >
Z o ~
V O V1
Number of Arrests 1854 126 101 58 7
Rate per 1000 Pop 631 541 345 806 28
1993-1997
°Arrests for all developments and city
e
Ve O
z z
s
Ar est 'nso
ht
1!!7
Green St
Y on
t u
JJ xi.
nt
f,
� X
s TI T WE
' a tic
pu►Ro Mevsiq
f UK=
° Map showing all arrests for the City of Ithaca, 1993-1997
L The arrest patterns clearly show that public housing has a higher than expected
frequency of arrests within and around the developments than would have been
expected based on population.
Most of those arrested are young males who do not live in the developments. They
are engaged in assaultive behavior in support of their drug habits and enterprises.*
*From conversations with IPD officers,July 1997.
C. NUMBERS OF LEASE TERMINA FOR DRUG-RELATED CRIME
•i
Ithaca Housing Authority Vacancy/Occupancy Report Summaries
1997
reason for leaving Eviction
development /unknown abandoned health noise/crime drugs relocation Drugs Crime Other/no payment
Titus I & II 2 0 10 0 0 4 0 0 0
Northside 1 2 0 1 1 6 0 0 0
Southview 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 0 0
Overlook 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
19%
reason for leaving Eviction
development unknown abandoned health noise rime drugs relocation Drugs Crime Other/no payment
Titus I & II 3 0 21 1 0 10 0 0 0
Northside 5 1 0 0 0 17 2 0 2
Southview 1 1 0 1 0 7 0 0 0
Overlook 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 1
1995
reason for leaving Eviction
-+evelopment unknown abandoned health noise/crime drugs relocation Drugs Crime Other/no payment
dust & 11 5 0 34 0 0 16 0 0 0
Northside 6 2 0 1 0 18 0 0 4
Southview 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Overlook 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. NUMBER OF LOCAL EMERGENCY ROOM ADMISSIONS
It is estimated that about that about 40 percent of all emergency room admissions
are directly drug related. About 80 percent all emergency room admissions involve
someone having abused either alcohol or other drugs. These estimates were
provided by an emergency room nurse during a discussion about the nature of crime
and injury in Ithaca.
Dealing with substance abuse will clearly reduce the level of crime in our
developments. As indicated above, addressing substance abuse problems could
significantly reduce the number of assaults, drug, disorderly and alcohol offenses in
both Northside and Southview.
E NUMBER OF POLICE CALLS
The table below shows the total number of complaints handled by the police for
selected types of calls for service from 1993 to July 1997. The numbers of calls have
declined slightly from year to year. However, calls to report graffiti were up 400
percent in 1996. Similarly, there was an increase in firearm discharges and drug
possessions. Of note is the fact that the first 6 months of 1997 saw as many alcohol
violations as were recorded in the previous four-year period. The rest of the offenses
are on a similar pace to the previous years in 1997.
Ithaca Police Department Complaint Totals 1993-July 1997
Offense 11997 1%Chane 119961%Chane 11995 1% Chane 11994 1993
Assault 49 6% 115 -39% 108 16% 177 152
Menacing/Reckless Endangerment 12 -15% 40 213% 47 -72% 15 54
Homicide 1 100% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0
Rope/Sex offenses 13 13°x6 35 -40% 31 0% 52 52
Tresspassing 253 11% 505 -1% 453 -6% 457 484
Burglary 135 -21% 190 -35% 241 -19% 369 457
Tampering/Mischief 235 -1% 502 -21% 505 -16% 637 762
Graffiti 5 400% 5 100% 1 0% 0 0
Arson 2 -50% 4 0% 8 100% 8 4
Larceny 529 -19% 1188 -16% 1461 -3% 1748 1803
Robbery 34 -8% 46 28% 50 -35% 39 60
Drug Sales 11 -81% 21 260% 108 -38% 30 48
Drug Possesssion 70 38% 189 -8% 137 126% 149 66
Disconduct-any 331 -14% 799 14% 934 -6% 819 875
harrassment 386 12% 1007 33% 8% -22% 676 867
weapon possession/violation 5 -7% 13 .27% 14 -39% 11 18
alcohol violations 190 5% 196 -9% 186 44% 205 142
firearm discharge 7 150% 10 -71% 4 133% 14 6
total number of calk 2268 -6% 4866 -4% 5186 -8% 5406 5850
The next table shows the calls for services by site by year by both the number and
rate per 1000 population. The public housing developments have consistently more
calls per 1000 population than for the City as a whole. Calls in Northside have
declined from 1,948 per 1000 in 1994 to 1,129 in 1996. The decline for Southview is
Calls for Service by Site for 1993
W
LL O
O 0 0
V Z I rn IO H
Number of Calls 1 153541 2951 1031 371 122
Rate per 1000 Pop 1 5201 12661 14311 12761 494
Calls for Service by Site for 1994
Number of Calls 1 152251 4541 2211 131 488
Rate per 1000 Pop 1 5161 19481 30691 4481 1976
Calls for Service by Site for 1995
Number of Calls I 11121 32111501 231 75
Rate per 1000 Pop 1 3771 13781 20831 7931 304
Calls for Service by Site for 1996
Number of Calls 1 81231 2631 111 251 78
Rate per 1000 Pop 1 275 11291 1542 8621 316
much more dramatic, dropping from more than 3,000 calls per 1000 population in
1994 to about 1,500 calls per 1000 population in 1996.
We are interested in continuing that trend. However, to do so we must understand
the nature of the calls. The next table helps us do that.
1993 CALLS FOR SERVICE PER 1000 POPULATION BY AREA
OFFENSES
i~
y LL } y a o
~ y it J O cc
AREA = W J Z zNJ t/1 O = v a O J
yQ C y d' tOn m O N cc
O v N lnn H
Q Vl = 10
fD C O O O � N J LL H
NORTHSIDE 21 17 0 641 69 82 4 2831 13 4 13 521 3051 13 17 120 73 116 1266
SOURMEW 14 0 0 28 69 167 0 292 141 0 0 56 528 14 0 97 28 125 1431
OVERLOOK 0 0 0 103 207 345 0 69 0 0 0 0 345 0 0 103 34 69 1276
TITUS 1&II 0 8 0 28 8 81 4 81 0 0 0 0 146 4 4 73 12 45 494
R 7 2 0 15 14 24 0 57 2 1 1 3 60 2 3 251 9 20 245
1994 CALLS FOR SERVICE PER 1000 POPULATION BY AREA
NORTHSIDE 52 0 0 1121 73 150 9 5671 4 0 171 561 421 9 4711721 56 206 1948
SOUTFMEW 111 0 0 167 26 292 0 486 0 0 0 139 722 0 97 375 153 500 3069
OVERLOOK69 0 0 34 69 34 0 69 0 0 0 103 0 0 34 0 0 34 448
TITUS 18,11 12 0 0 32 16 45 0 182 0 8 0 0 1482 0 0 105 28 65 1976
ITHA 8 2 0 21 17 29 0 76 2 2 3 7 63 2 5 41 11 37 327
1995 CALLS FOR SERVICE PER 1000 POPULATION BY AREA
NORTHSIDE 13 4 0 94 64 99 0 3481 4 4 261 391 339 17 911651 39 124 1378
SOUTHVIEW 42 0 0 125 56 125 0 403 28 0 14 181 611 20 14 306 69 83 2083
OVERLOOK 34 0 0 0 69 0 0 207 0 34 0 0 276 0 0 34 34 103 793
TITUS 1811 8 0 0 12 20 49 0 45 0 0 0 12 73 0 0 49 8 28 304
ITHACA 5 1 0 14 11 16 0 45 2 1 21 71 58 1 2 30 8 20 223
1996 CALLS FOR SERVICE PER 1000 POPULATION BY AREA
NORTHSIDE 21 9 0 69 4311241 0 253 41 91 9 56 2491 9 17 1721 41 82 1129
SOMMEW 69 14 0 125 56 153 0 236 42 431 0 0 236 42 125 1542
OVERLOOK 0 34 0 103 0 0 0 310 34 103 0 34 103 34 69 862
TITUS 1&11 0 0 0 36 20 36 4 49 12 77 0 0 28 32 12 316
ITHAC 5 1 0 16 9 17 0 37 '2141 6 51 1 3 26 7 18 202
Source: Ithaca Police Department,Calls for Service for 1994-1997
This following table breaks down the calls for services by major categories in order to
study the types of calls that are being received. It would appear that Overlook has
particular problems with trespassing, suspicious persons, burglary, vandalism and
disorderly conduct. Northside has problems with larcenies, drugs, disorderly conduct
and suspicious persons. Southview has problems with trespassing, burglary,
vandalism, larceny, drugs and disorderly conduct.
This table shows that while the number of calls to the police has decreased over the
last three years, the ratio of offenses which have occurred in public housing have not
changed that much. Each year, calls regarding drug offenses in public housing
represent about 14 percent of all drug calls received by the police. This is 6.2 times
higher than would have been expected had there not been a disproportionate
number of calls in and around the public housing family developments. The data
also show that calls peaked in 1994 when nearly 5 times more calls were received by
the police than would be expected based on population. The normal figures for
1993, 1995 and 1996 were 3.1 times as many calls from public housing residents as
would have been expected based on their proportion of the population (2.3%).
Calls for Se lcobyTywpoof all.Location and Ratio to Public Housing urina 1993
wz LL a o
X tL
Vf > NQF OVf W Cr m �
V N
N
LL> w O O O Vf j O
NORTHSIDE 5 4 0 15 16 19 1 66 3 1 3 12 71 3 4 281 17 27 295
SOUT"VIEW 1 0 0 2 5 12 0 21 1 0 0 4 38 1 0 7 21 9 103
OVERLOOK 0 0 0 3 6 10 0 2 0 0 10 0 0 3 1 2 37
TITUS IdJI 0 2 0 7 2 20 1 20jR
0 0 36 1 1 18 3 11 122
ITHA 200 53 0 457 427 711 2 168835 97 1768 52 86 728 259Number of Csi 206 59 0 484 456 772 4 179738 113 1923 57 91 784 282 641 7799
Public Housin As:
Percent of Cells 3% 10% NA 6% 6% 8% 50% 6%17%13%18%114%1 8%19%1 5% 7%1 8% 0%1 7%
Ratio to Popubdon 1 1.31 4.4 NA 2.4 2.8 3.4 21.7 2.612.911.413.41 6.21 3.513.81 2.41 3.113.51 3.31 3.1
Calls for Service by T me of Call Location and Ratio to Public Hous no during 1994
NORTHSIDE 121 0 01 261 171 35 21 1321 1 0 41 131 98 2 111 40 13 48 454
SOUTMEW 81 0 0 121 21 21 0 351 0 0 01 101 52 0 71 27 11 36 221
OVERLOOK 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 2 0 0 01 31 0 0 1 0 0 1 13
TITUS I&H 3 0 0 6 4 11 0 45 0 2 0 0 366 0 0 26 7 16 486
ITHACA 235 68 0 605 492 860 13 2249 50 53 97 213 1851 62 159 1220 317 1089 9633
Number of Cal 260 68 0652 517 928 15 2463 51 55 101 239 2367 64 178 1313 348 1190 10809
Public Housin As:
Percent of Calls 10% 0% NA 7% 5% 7% 13% 9%12%14%14%111%122%13%111%1 7%19%1 8%1 15;
th
Rato ulation 4.21 0.0 NA 3.1 2.1 3.2 5.81 3.810.911.611.71 4.71 9.511.41 4.61 3.113.91 3.71 4.7
Calls for Service by T me of Call Location and Ratio to Public Hous no during 1996
NORTHSIDE 5 4 0 151 161 191 1 661 31 1 3 121 71 3 41 281 17 27 295
SOUTMEW 1 0 0 21 51 121 0 21 1 0 0 4 38 1 0 7 21 9 103
OVERLOOK 0 0 0 3 61 101 0 2 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 31 2 37
TITUS 1&11 0 2 0 7 21 201 1 20 0 0 0 0 36 1 1 18 3 11 122
n1iACA 200 53 0 457 427 711 2 1688 56 31 35 97 1768 52 86 728 259 592 7242
Number of Cal 206 59 0 484 456 772 4 1797 60 32 38-113 1923 57 91 784 282 641 7799
Public Housing As:
Percent of Calls 3%110%1 NA 16%16%18%150%1 6%17%13%18%114%1 8%19%1 5% 7%18%1 8% 7%
R:sdovoPbpuhwknl 1.31 4.41NAI 2.412.813.4121.71 2.612.911.413.41 6.21 3.513.81 2.41 3.113.51 3.31 3.1
Calls for Service by T me of Call Location and Ratio to Public Hous no during 1996
NORTHSIDE 51 4 0 151 161 191 1 661 31 1 3 12 711 3 4 281 17 27 295
SOUTHVIEW 1 0 0 2 51 121 0 21 11 0 0 4 3BI 1 0 7 21 9 103
OVERLOOK 0 0 0 3 6 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 31 2 37
TITUS Mil 0 2 0 7 2 20 1 20 0 0 0 0 36 1 1 18 3 11 122
ITHA 200 53 0 457 427 711 2 1688 56 31 35 97 1768 52 86 728 259 592 7242
Number of Calls 206 591 0 4B4 45617721 4 1797 60 32 3B 113 1923 57 91 784 282 641 7799
Public Hous in As
Percent of Calls 3% 10% NA 6% 6% B% 50% 6%17%13%18%114%1 8%19%1 5% 7%18%1 B% 7%
Ratio to ladon 1.3 4.4 NA 2.4 2.8 3.4 21.7 2.612.911.413.416.2 3.513.81 2.4 3.113.51 3.3 3.1
Note: Pubk Housing represent&2.3%of the population of the Cky of Ithaca. Neark 40%of the population
lives In Titus Towers l&ff.
Not all calls to the police were wfuded for this anayais. Ony those fisted above wereincluded. There were more than 20,000 calfs in total.
F. NUMBER OF RESIDENTS N TREATMENT AND AFTERCARE AND THE NUMBER
SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETING TREATMENT AND AFTERCARE PROGRAMS
1996 Substance Abuse,Treatment Profile,
Tompkins County,New York
Estimated Number of Adult Drug Users
Total Regular and Heavy Drug Users 2475 Dreokdosm of Drug Llow Typos''INS
Heavy Narcotics Abusers 400
Regular and Heavy Cocaine Users 450
Other Regular and Heavy Drug Users 1625
1995 Substance Abuse Treatment Capacity ■Total RevAw end
Drug-Free: HmN Drug Users
Residential Beds 60 33% tPi6 �
WHwryHorp
Inpatient Rehabilitation Beds 0 y Abusers
Day Service Beds 0 13 RegAw and Heavy
Outpatient Slots 0 C,, , ,LIM$
RCDY Beds 0 pq�RMM and
Drug-Free Medically Supervised: Heavy Drug Users
Day Service Slots 0
Outpatient Slots 250
Detozifrcahon:
Hospital Beds 0
Residential Beds 0
Outpatient Slots 0
Methadone Maintenance:
Residential Beds 0
Outpatient Slots 0
Methadone to Abstinence:
Residential Beds 0
Outpatient Slots 0
ad ftpwea roAbtt pceased or eartricMd eapacMea es W ij't/8b
1994 Admissions to Substance Abuse Treatment
admission category a e
Total Admissions to programs in county 3B1 202 0
Admissions of county resierds to treatment 350 43 5
Percent Female 25.10% 16.30% 60.00%
Percent African American 22.00% 25.60% 0.00%
Percent Latino 6.60% 7.00% 0.00%
Percent Native American 6% 0% 0%
Percent Youth 19.40% 14.00% 0.00%
Percent Homeless 4.60% 7.00% 20.00%
Percent Criminal Justice Clients 64.60% 48.60% 20.00%
1995 Substance Abse PraventionAntervendon Programs
community-based prevention 0
School-based Prevention 1
Other Specialized Services 0
this information visa provided by OASAS(New York State Office of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Services-
Bureau
ervicesBureau of Communications and Community Relations. 1450 Western Avenue,Albany,NY 122033526
this info"ion refers to the substance abuse treatment programa of Tompkins County,New York.
A se is the treatment center and is located'nW outside Ithaca.
G. SURVEYS OF RESIDENTS AND STAFF AND OTHER RESEARCH
Ithaca Police Department Perception of Crime and Security in IHA Developments'
•Sgt. Harrington, Records Division, IPD,and Community Police Officer Kathy Torres
discussing crime in IHA properties
The People
There are several groups responsible for the crime in and around Ithaca Housing Authority
developments. Even though the characteristics of these groups may differ, most are
involved in the illicit drug market—either selling or buying. It is the drug trade itself, and
crimes associated with the drug markets that are responsible for most of the crimes, that
occur in Ithaca's developments.
One group consists of "boyfriends" of local teenage and young adult females (15-25).
Many of these "boyfriends" are from outside Ithaca, and have come to the area to fill
demands in the drug market. They often set up shop in or near the apartment of their
girlfriend, where they will also often reside. Typically, these men are young, mid-teens
through mid twenties,but some are older adult males.
Ithaca's drug dealers typically deal in crack cocaine, but heroine sales are beginning to
rise. The dealers have connections to drug groups in Elmira, New York (35 miles
southwest),and often conduct business both in Elmira, and with Elmira dealers who come
to Ithaca. Thus, catching dealers becomes difficult sometimes because of the dealers'
' Information compiled from the comments of Officer Newby, Ithaca Police Department,
during a ride-along on July 24, 1997.
outside ties and mobility. Of course many dealers have big-city connections to New York
City or Philadelphia and are sometimes more transient than Ithaca's normal selling cohort.
Another group that is involved in drugs, vandalism, assaults, or any number of crimes is
the"fearless"young men of the IHA developments. These are typically the teenage males
ranging from 12 to 19. The biggest problem facing this group is that most do not fear jail.
Because they do not have any qualms about being booked or even spending time
imprisoned,this group of rogue youth is comprised of chronic repeat offenders. The drug
market only exacerbates crime committal among this group. Many of these young men
have been raised in families where incarceration is considered normal. By associating
with family members, friends' families, and older friends and acquaintances, many of
Ithaca's teenage males think of being arrested, or going to jail as a normal, educational
experience. They are simply walking in the footsteps of friends and family members that
have gone before them. Because jail has become "normal" or even expected,
incarceration is not disincentive enough to not commit crime. Of course Ithaca is not
unique in its problem with these repeat offending youth. This is the identical socializing
cycle that is played out in the lives of thousands of youths in American cities. What
makes this cycle different in Ithaca, however, is that Ithaca Is a small city of 29,000
people with a big city repeat offense problem among many of its youth.
Gangs are another group that causes crime problems in Ithaca. The Gangster Disciples,
Little Rascal Krew (LRK), CROWS (Vietnamese) and Latin Kings have been noted.
However, the gangs here are small and weak compared to their metropolitan
counterparts. There are some loose associations with "Gangster Disciples," but overall
there are neither large organized gangs nor groups affiliated with big city gangs in the city
of Ithaca or in Ithaca Public Housing Developments. Many of the small gangs that do
exist are loosely organized and revolve primarily around the drug trade—both in the
acquisition and distribution of drugs and drug money.
The final group of known offenders in and around IHA developments could be known as
"the regulars." These individuals' behavior is often predictable by the police. These
individuals tend to be older than many of the youth groups and often times are involved
with crimes ranging from theft to support drug habits to public intoxication and harassment.
The Places
In looking at the areas in and around IHA's developments at night and during the day,
there are some areas that are crime hotspots. Some of the areas where crime is
committed most frequently are dilapidated houses adjacent to the developments. Along
Plain Street, north and south of Southview, is one area where Ithaca Police officers
frequently are called. Madison Avenue near Conway Park at Northside is another crime
hot spot. Houses in a state of disrepair and poor lighting characterize many of these
areas. Often the unkempt state of these areas promotes a sense of disorder as anything
from old clothing to garbage and shopping carts are strewn across the property. The 300
block of North Plain Street is a known for its crack houses. Similarly,Cleveland Avenue is
known as a drug and crime area. Both of these areas are close to the Southview
development. The Ithaca Police Department knows that these areas are crime hot spots
because they are constantly receiving complaint calls for the developments.
H. Interviews with Resident Leaders
As part of our data collection we conducted structured interviews with the leaders of each
of the family developments. The results of these interviews are discussed below.
•Resident leaders at Southview pose for pictures.
+fl Y
t
f
. Iv
4 tiv
�y
Personal Safety
Concerning personal safety and feelings of security in and around their respective
developments, the residents of both Southview and Northside responded similarly.
Generally,the residents of Southview and Northside reported feeling very safe inside their
apartments. Residents of both developments also said they felt safe outdoors during the
daytime. However, neither Southview or Northside residents felt safe outdoors during the
nightime. In fact, both groups emphasized their fear of being outside in and around the
developments at night. There was a divergence between the groups. While Southview
residents said that they felt safer now than a year ago, Northside residents reported
feeling more unsafe than a year ago.
Residents reported feeling more unsafe in some areas. At Southview, the residents felt
especially unsafe at the comer by the playground where individuals frequently loiter and
smoke madjauna. Southview residents also voiced their concern about`ousiders" loitering
in and near the development's laundry room. Residents at Northside reported feeling
unsafe in all areas after dark, especially near the three story unit on Hancock Street.
Residents attribute these feelings of fear and insecurity to the drug trade that goes on at
night in the Hancock Street site and other areas in and near the development grounds.
Northside residents also said they were concerned about children under fifteen playing
outside, because of problems with older youths who were not residents but who
frequented the development. Despite the concerns Northside focus group participants
reported about their own development, they said Southview seemed more unsafe than
their own development.
PercePborl of Crime and Drugs
Both the Northside and Southview focus groups said that overall crime is a problem in
their developments. Northside residents said crime is a "major' problem in their
development. In both developments, residents perceive various substance abuse
problems. These problems range from youths smoking marijuana(Southview)and public
inoxication(Northside),to crack cocaine dealing at both locations.
Southview residents report having fewer drug-related crime problems in the last year
because during that time period the Ithaca Housing Authority has taken an active role in
evicting drug dealers. They also report an increase in drug busts at their development
during the last year.
Northside residents specifically cited robbery, firearm discharge, alcohol offenses, and
drug dealing as major problems in the focus group survey. Another specific crime problem
reported by Northside residents was harassment by drunks and drug dealers who often
employ Rottweiler dogs as a means of intimidation and protection.
Perception of Disorder
Residents at both developments praised the effort of the Ithaca Housing Authority
maintenance staff for their prompt and meticulous upkeep of the properties. Focus group
participants felt the orderly appearance of the developments was attributable to the
maintenance department's exceptional performance. There are some problem litter spots,
however. For example, the dumpster in the parking 'lot adjacent to the Northside
Community Center often overflows, and abandoned shopping carts are frequently
discarded on the properties.
One area in which residents themselves excelling in is enforcing parking violations. The
developments' parking lots are well marked, thus allowing the residents to monitor any
unregistered automobiles in their parking lots. Residents of Southview report being
especially prompt in calling for outsiders'cars to be towed.
Residents often call police for noise complaints,but noise in general is not a huge concern
among surveyed residents. Most noise is limited to parties or the occasional group of
teens on development grounds at night.
Unattended children do seem to be a problem in these developents. This is of primary
concern to residents, because unauthorized persons visit both developments. According
to residents, in some cases unauthorized persons live in the development. And even
though in most cases these "unauthorized" persons are relatives or friends of residents,
they contribute to the sense of disorder in the developments.
Even with the high marks given to maintenance and the upkeep of the physical facilities at
the developments, residents said that lighting is poor in several areas of both Southview
and Northside. According to residents in both developments, the parking lot areas are
lacking light. Areas along Southview's frontage on Plain Street are also quite dark at night.
Peroep ions of Police Pertorrrmnoe
Residents reported having"good"relations with the Ithaca Police Department. They were
especially pleased with the visibility and effectiveness of the officers of the Communty
Policing Division of the Ithaca Police Department who spend considerable time in the
developments and frequent the areas either on bike or foot patrol.
However, both focus groups reported slow response times by the police to the housing
authority developments—sometimes as long as 20 minutes after a call. Also, while
residents at Southview gave the police high ranks in the"trustworthiness"category of the
survey, the Northside residents said they did not have great confidence in the police's
trustworthiness. In fact, Northside residents that attended the focus group meeting said
they only trusted 3 officers on the entire police force.
Perception of Housing Authority's Perkwmance
Overall, the residents were pleased by the job the Ithaca Housing Aurthority is doing.
While residents regret that IHA is not more actively involved in organizing and promoting
resident activities and meetings(only a handful of residents attend meetings like the focus
groups),they were pleased how IHA carries out other functions. Residents feel the HA's
relationship with them has improved in the last year,and that conditions are"much better'
than a year earlier. As mentioned above, residents gave high marks to IHA for strict drug
eviction enforcment. Also, as mentioned in the section on perception of disorder, IHA
residents have nothing but priase for the maintenance department.
What is needed most to improve resident safety and security in IHA developments?
Most of the focus group residents were already active in Neighborhood Watch programs in
their communities. However, only the resident officers were active in these programs.
They stated that it was difficult to get anyone else involved.
When asked what was needed most to improve resident safety and security,the residents
identified the following in their order of importance:
1. More police patrols by community police officers
2. Better lighting of the areas
3. Better screening of residents who move into the developments
4. Policies to address viscious dogs being brought on the properties by persons involved
in the drug trade
5. Job training and employment programs
Residents were not very supportive of a suggestion that the residents themselves get
involved in the selection of new residents. They were concerned that such a process
might result in too homogeneous a population. They felt the strength of the community
was its ethnic diversity with Cambodians living next to Blacks and Hispanics, Russians as
neighbors to native New Yorkers,etc.
L COST OF VANDALISM
Vandalism is a major cost in the
IHA. Units go unrented because of
vandalism. Prospective residents
refuse to rent because of the drug
and vandalism problems in the
community. Maintenance and ' ".
management are constantly finding
cocaine wrappers and baggies in
the community, usually next to a
broken window or bottle. '
i
The crack bags shown here were
found outside the units at
Southview on South Plain Street. ..
The maintenance report for July 25
indicated several broken windows and lights near where the crack bags were found.
Residents complain of increasing gang activities in the area. While they may not talk
to the police for fear of reprisals, they do share this information with the IHA
Maintenance Director.
J. SCHOOL DROUPOUr AND LEVEL OF SUSPENSIONS
The suspension rate is higher for blacks than their population ratio would suggest.
Since a higher ratio of blacks live in assisted housing, it is not unusual that our youths
are suspended more often than are other youths. Education is also a major problem
among our residents. It is estimated that nearly two thirds of the residents dropped
out of school before completing high school. This is in contrast to the current drop
out rate of 4.1% from public schools per year today. Still, nearly two of every four
youths in public housing do not complete school.
The Ithaca City School District reports the suspension rates in its Secondary Schools
for the 1994-95 school year to be 18% of total secondary school students (582
suspensions). Aftrican Americans had a disproportionately high suspension rate as
the following table documents.
1994-95 Secondary School Suspensions for RaciaVEthnic Groups
SCHOOL Asian and African Hispanic White Total
Native American
American
Boynton 0 17 0 43 60
Dewitt 7 14 1 741 96
Ithaca H.S. 9 58 11 334 412
`./ Alternate Community School 2 4 0 8 14
TOTAL 18 93 12 459 582
Suspensions by School and Race/Ethnicity
!� Alternate Community School
Ithaca H.S.
Dew itt
Boynton
CD C U m
Z Cd C •�
C a 3
Z lC m y
E _
N Q
E
U
Q Q
V
Ithaca School District—Ithaca High School Drop-Out numbers by
raciabethnic group
RACIAL-ETHNIC GROUP 1992-93 1993-94 199495
African American 7 7 15
Asian/Pacific Islander 6 2 3
Hispanic 4 4 1
White .28 53 48
I.H.S.Totals 45 1 69 1 67
• The 1994-95 drop-out rate at Ithaca High School was 4.1%
(67 out of 1629 total enrolled)
• The 1994-95 drop-out rate at Alternate Community School was
2.7%(4 out of 261 total enrolled)
• Tompkins County Total high school drop-out rate: 2%
[Source: Tompkins County Youth Bureau, Children & Youth in
Ithaca, 1996.1
K. SITUATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF THE PROPERTIES
During focus groups with the residents, we heard about the lighting of the
buildings and the dark areas within the developments. Management and
maintenance have repeatedly found drug paraphernalia and evidence of drug
activities in and around the vacant units. The following is an assessment of the
physical properties with some recommendations for strategies to address any
problems that the assessment uncovered.
` Titus Towers is located on the
Southside of Ithaca, is surrounded
by residential, and park areas.
As housing for the elderly, The
wa Towers are located near
shopping and a bus comes
regularly to transport the
residents to shopping, doctors,
and other errands.
Titus Towers is generally well lit.
Titus Towers Three exceptions existed. First,
the entrance off Wood Street
was dark, partly because trees
blocked the light from a street
light near the children's
playground. Plans are
underway to place additional
lighting along this drive.
Second, a path from the back
parking lot to the next street is
dark and could pose a security
risk for the IHA. It must either
be fenced, lighted, posted or all
three. Finally, lights were out
along the back of the building
creating dark areas next to the
rear entrance. Additional
lighting is recommended for this
Northside area.
G
The Northside development is
well maintained and an attractive
estate with two open courtyards
and play equipment. The units
are not crowded on top of one
another except in the 500 block
.. of Hancock.
Lighting is sparse. Many of the
interior lights were removed in
the late 1980s as an energy
' efficiency measure. The lighting
that remains is inadequate for
the kinds of problems and issues
that have been raised above.
The fixtures are old and clouded
and do not emit much light.
In spite of the reputation, it was
good to see children regularly
— -- - -- la outside.
Northside residents enjoy grassy
large courtyards with some play
equipment. However, there are
_ no clear environmental cues
'it regarding either yards or to
whom the courtyards belong.
Consideration should be given to
minimal fencing to define the
semi-private and private areas
from the semi-public and public
ones.
As mentioned above, gang
graffiti has started to appear in
t the community. Such graffiti
needs to be removed and the
territory reclaimed.
ST r
IHA has taken steps to
implement policies and
procedures to make the
community safer. Policies and; Y
signage is in place to keep non-
residents off the properties.
Interviews with staff and
residents reveal that these
policies have worked well in
reducing the numbers of
outsiders loitering on the
properties for drug-related
activities.
Southview
Southview is an attractive
smaller development on South
Plain Street. The residents
enjoy shaded front yards.
However, there is little definition
showing the progression from
semi-private parking lots to
private individual yards. Either
low shrubs lining the sidewalks
or low fences can create such
. . :y definition. These could be
' installed along the main walks to
create a sense of ownership
-_ Fencing has been used to
separate the complex from the
.. adjacent housing. This fencing
---- has reduced foot intrusion
significantly. The IHA recently
installed vandal-proof porch
--- lights that are wired to come on
----.---=- at dusk and go off at sunrise.
These lights have successfully
illuminated the back walkways
without shining in the bedrooms
of the residents.
The playground is located in the
back corner of the development
at the ends of the apartment
buildings. Its location isolates it
from the development and the
watchful eyes of the residents. It
is not well lit and there are
several holes in the fence, which
permit trespassing and evasion
from the watchful eyes of the
residents and the police.
Because of its location, it has
been a place where non-
residents gather at night to drink
and do dru s.
Laundry facility and community
room are located in the center of
the complex. Both facilities are
used frequently by the residents.
However, poor lighting in the
oG area attracts outsiders in the
evenings. Some residents
complained that the laundry is
used by outsiders and as a
meeting place for young people.
. Maintenance on the site is
■• �• responsive and rated very highly
by the residents. However, the
location of the development in a
relatively high drug area results
in the vandalism of vacancies
and excessive damages to the
property at this site.
The main parking lot needs
better lighting and signage
explaining the parking policies
and ground rules about who can
park and be on site. The rules
should also state the IHA's
exceptions are for the actions of
guests and visitors to the
property.
One of the key findings of the situational assessment is the need for additional
lighting in both of the larger family developments and the elderly. There is a
concern about retaining a level of energy efficiency that is required by HUD. This
concern resulted in the removal of nearly half of the lights in the Northside
complex.
There is a cost effective alternative to installing costly high-maintenance pole
lights which may work well in these developments. Lower cost floodlights
controlled by light and motion sensors could be installed in low lit areas where
constant lighting is not needed. The motion sensors accomplish three important
goals:
1. They are energy efficient because they are only on when an animal or person
comes within range. They can be set to stay on for a few minutes to as much
as half-an-hour.
2. They give the impression that someone is watching. When lights come on as
someone approaches a door, it communicates that someone is watching and
waiting for them to come to the door.
3. They alert residents and the police when someone is in the area, especially
those areas where we want to discourage people from being late at night.
Additionally, should the police be following someone, they will be able to trace
that person's activities as the lights come on; it will make it harder to
disappear into the shadows.
Another key result of this study is the need for ways to create defensible space,
such as clearly defined yards and courtyards that belong to the residents. We do
not want to create environments which seem institutional or which communicate a
sense of isolation.
Low Fences Low fences can achieve these goals without
aa,... �•�.•� -� �. making the community seem unfriendly. If
fencing is installed, it should be compatible
with the existing fences in the area. We
observed low picket fences near both
developments. Unfortunately, these fences
ER•^�'•• are high maintenance when compared to low
W walls, shrubs and wrought iron.
Mon F• yy I ^
•��b�4Y1 w.v i..rlw. r.
Fq wid.r• tl 1
a.M4 m4:ne.r•'e
•w.e.e 9
CMRM1
ohR.
4
L SUMMARY OF RNDINGS
Our findings are summarized below. In the next secion we will address each of
.i
these problems in terms of the strategies that we will propose.
Problem Nature of the Problem Source of Information
Drug-Related Crime Higher than expected Ithaca Police Department
number of arrests in and
around public housing for
drug offenses
Vandalism and damages to Ithaca Housing Authority
property from drug activities
Vacancies and evictions Ithaca Housing Authority
attributable to drugs and
crime exceed evictions and
vacancies for non-payment
High numbers of non- Ithaca Police Department,
residents arrested for illegal Resident and Staff interviews
acts on or near IHA property
Juvenile Crime Rates Arrests of juveniles nearly Ithaca Police Department
equaled those of adults in
1996
High suspension rates for Tompkins County Youth
youths from school Bureau
High unemployment and Average incomes are below IHA statistics, Resident
lowincaomnes $5,000 per year and Interviews
unemployment exceed 75%
Need for Intervention and The number of drug related Ithaca Police Department,
Treatment incidents is high among IHA interviews with residents,
residents police and NY State Office of
Alcoholism and Substance
Abuse Services
Control over the Inadequate lighting in Situational Assessment
environment Soutview and Northside act conducted by SPARTA
as havens for the drug Consulting Corporation,
activities Resident interviews
Inadequate definitions of the Situational Assessment by
yards SPARTA Consulting
Corporation
Graffiti is found in key areas Situational Assessment by
in Northside SPARTA Consulting
Corporation
Activity#1: Reimbursement of Local Law Enforcement Agency for Additional Security
& Protective Services...to reduce the supply of drugs.
Brief Program Description: The Ithaca Housing Authority will continue to contract in Year 2 of the
PHDEP with the Ithaca Police Department to achieve these goals.
Goal 1: Residents will have a greater sense of security by regular on-site neighborhood
police presence:
• increase on-site community police officer(s) approximately 4 hours per
week at each of the three larger sites (Titus Towers/Parkside Gardens,
Northside, Southview) and periodically at the Overlook Terrace site.
Goal 2: Residents will have greater trust in the Ithaca Police Department's ability to
respond to their calls in a timely and respectful manner:
• increase residents' contact with IPD community police officers by being
on-site;
• inform residents of IPD procedures re: reports and complaints;
• convene "forums" with IPD community police officers for concerns and
suggestions to improve IPD's responsiveness.
Goal 3: Residents will initiate/continue Neighborhood Watch, education, and/or other
appropriate methods of increasing neighborhood involvement to enhance personal
security:
• assess safety and security issues among the residents;
• respond to these issues with IPD staff and other community resources
through neighborhood meetings;
• develop a plan of action to address the issues on a long-term basis,
which build the community's capacity to monitor and diminish the level of
drug and other threatening activities.
Current Level of Policing Activity. No specific assignment of Ithaca Police Department personnel
is provided to the IHA sites. Police services in these four sites are the same as could be
expected by any other resident of the City of Ithaca [see attached Memorandum of Agreement].
The PHDEP funding would provide for continuation of community policing at the sites.
The short-term nature of this funding may preclude the hiring of a regular police officer and
therefore the calculations of the funding request are based on overtime rates for those of a senior
police officer, ranging between $42.50 and $49 an hour with a fringe benefit rate of 35%. The
PHDEP funding could potentially leverage city funding for another community police officer if the
city has the resources to continue the position after PHDEP funding.
Funds Requested for Activity: $29,725
Activity 1 Budget
Amplified Budget Items by Object Class Category:
PHDEP Funding Other local In-hind Sources
a. Personnel
.2 fte RI Program Assistant $ 3,500 $ 0
Total $ 3,500 $ 0
b. Fringe Benefits
35% of .2 fte $ 1,225 $ 0
Total $ 1,225 $ 0
f. Contractual
Direct labor &benefit contract with Ithaca Police Dept for approximately 15 hours/week for one year.
$25,000 $ 0
Total $25,000 $ 0
i. Total Direct Charges $29,725 $ 0