The Pittsburgh Police Department's New Strategy: A Bold Move with Unforeseen Consequences?

The recent announcement by Pittsburgh Police Chief Larry Scirotto to drastically reduce the types of calls to which officers will respond marks a bold and controversial shift in urban law enforcement strategy. By aiming to cut call volume from approximately 200,000 calls per year to about 50,000, the department is venturing into largely uncharted territory. This decision, designed to prioritize in-progress emergencies and free up officers for community engagement and other critical tasks, could have significant implications for the city's safety, community relations, and the overall efficacy of its police force.

Chief Scirotto's plan to redirect calls for issues like criminal mischief, theft, harassment, and burglary alarms to the telephone reporting unit or online reporting is innovative. It acknowledges a modern reality where police resources are increasingly stretched thin, necessitating a smarter, more focused approach to public safety. Moreover, assigning all parking complaints to the Pittsburgh Parking Authority is a practical move, especially given that parking issues are the department's number one complaint. This reallocation of responsibilities could indeed allow officers to be more present in the community, engaging in proactive measures rather than being bogged down by routine calls.

However, the strategy is not without its risks and potential downsides. The reduction in direct police response to certain types of incidents could lead to public perception issues, with residents feeling less secure in their homes and neighborhoods. The concerns voiced by citizens like Ginny Hamer-Kropf and Councilman Anthony Coghill highlight a crucial aspect of law enforcement: the need to balance efficiency with the public's expectation of safety and support. Particularly in cases of harassment or theft, the presence of an officer can provide not just a resolution to the immediate problem but also a sense of security and reassurance to the community.

The decision to not have a desk officer at any of the six zone stations between the hours of 3 a.m. and 7 a.m., relying instead on call boxes linked to 911, further exemplifies this balance. While data may not support the need for manned stations during these hours, the psychological impact on the community's sense of security should not be underestimated.

Moreover, the staffing plan, as critiqued by Bob Swartzwelder, President of the Pittsburgh Police Officers’ Union, points to a deeper issue within the police department: being "seriously over-committed and under-resourced." This highlights a nationwide challenge of police departments grappling with high demands and insufficient resources. The union's cautionary stance on the plan's viability, especially during high-demand events, underscores the need for flexibility and continuous reassessment of policing strategies.

Chief Scirotto's strategy represents a significant pivot in addressing the challenges of modern policing. While its focus on efficiency and community engagement is commendable, its success will heavily depend on its execution and the department's ability to adapt to the unforeseen challenges it will undoubtedly face. Engaging with the community, addressing their concerns transparently, and ensuring that the measures do not compromise public safety are crucial steps in ensuring that this bold strategy does not backfire. Only time will tell if this approach will set a precedent for urban law enforcement or serve as a cautionary tale.