Start Writing TodayCreate an account to write and share your own articles 

Trust in Action: Why Ongoing Engagement is the Key to Effective Policing

Trust in Action: Why Ongoing Engagement is the Key to Effective Policing

Community engagement is a crucial aspect of municipal government and management, particularly in the realm of law enforcement. One cannot overstate the importance of building a relationship of trust between the police department and the community it serves. This connection is vital to creating an environment where citizens feel safe and empowered, and the police department is viewed as a reliable, trustworthy institution.

Leadership plays a pivotal role in fostering such relationships. The responsibility of initiating and maintaining community engagement falls on the shoulders of those at the helm. For instance, the role of a police chief is not limited to administrative duties and crime control; they also need to actively participate in community interactions. A police chief who is frequently visible in community meetings or events sends a strong message to their officers about the significance of community engagement.

While initiatives like citizen police academies have proven effective in some areas, it is suggested that police departments extend their outreach beyond the confines of the station. Taking the department’s message directly to the people can have a more profound impact. For example, the Overland Park Police Department implemented a program called "OPPD on the Road," wherein they scheduled citizen police academy-like meetings around the city. This approach gave citizens easier access to these meetings as they were held closer to their homes and on weeknights, which potentially allowed for greater attendance.

Community meetings provide an excellent platform for direct communication between the citizens and the agency's CEO. They offer a forum for discussing concerns and issues, making the police chief accountable for addressing them. This exchange can lead to increased transparency and trust, improving the overall relationship between the police department and the community.

Community engagement, however, is not a one-time event. It needs to be an ongoing effort, consistently maintained and adapted according to the community's needs and feedback. Regular interaction and open lines of communication can facilitate a better understanding of the community's expectations and the police department's operations, leading to a healthier relationship.

It’s also important to note that community engagement can serve as an effective tool for preventing and solving crimes. Citizens who trust their police department are more likely to report crimes and cooperate with investigations. It also aids in community policing, a strategy that emphasizes the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address public safety issues.

In conclusion, the role of community engagement in the functioning of a municipal police department is paramount. It is a key factor in establishing legitimacy and trust, making the community feel safe and heard, and the police department more effective in its duties. A proactive approach to community engagement, led by the police chief, can go a long way in building a strong, cooperative relationship between the law enforcement agency and the community it serves.

Citations: 1. Drew, Joshua, and Kevin M. Haggerty. "Police-community relations: From war to partnership." In Policing Cities, pp. 95-113. Routledge, 2013. 2. Mazerolle, Lorraine, Sarah Bennett, Jacqueline Davis, Elise Sargeant, and Matthew Manning. "Procedural justice and police legitimacy: A systematic review of the research evidence." Journal of Experimental Criminology 9, no. 3 (2013): 245-274. 3. Rosenbaum, Dennis P. "The limits of hot spots policing." In Police innovation, pp. 245-263. Cambridge University Press, 2006. 4. Skogan, Wesley G., Susan M. Hartnett, Jill DuBois, Jennifer T. Comey, Marianne Kaiser, and Justine Lovig. "Public involvement: Community policing in Chicago." Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice (2000).