Teaneck tackles the gang issue

Back at the end of March, in the immediate aftermath of a frightening (and eye-opening) gang-related incident in town that led to ten arrests, I wrote:

Teaneck must be free of all gang activity. Public safety officials should study the problem carefully, putting egos aside and drawing on outside resources with the necessary expertise and experience when appropriate, to tell us exactly what they need to make sure we do not have to fear this anymore. And we ought to be ready to consider their requests carefully and do all we can to equip our officers to blot this out of Teaneck for good, even if it means putting other longstanding priorities aside.

Now, as Brian Aberback reports in today's Record, I have gotten my wish. Police Chief Tiernan has presented the Council with what he believes the Teaneck Police Department requires to end the scourge of gang violence in town. His proposed solution, the addition of 14 additional officers to the force, may well break the backs of the gangs in Teaneck, but in the process of doing so, it could also break the bank. With a first year projected cost of $676,000, it is not surprising that Council members, who are loathe to heap additional financial burdens on an already heavily-taxed populace, gave the proposal a lukewarm reception.

The Deputy Mayor summed up the difficult position local officials are in.

"I'm not against [hiring new officers], but I just don't know to what extent," said Deputy Mayor Lizette Parker. "On an emotional level, I'd hire 50 officers because it's a frightening situation. But it's not that easy."

This is certainly quite the bind. It is politically impossible to reject the Police Chief's request outright. With an alarming rise in gang incidents over the past year and media reporting that a second grade teacher at the Lowell School "frequently stops students in the class from flashing hand signs and finger messages that mimic gang style communications," there is no way the Township can avoid taking vigorous action.

At the same time, with a huge jump in the municipal budget this year and little prospect of any near term progress in finding ways to spread the tax burden away from homeowners, this Council would almost guarantee that it would fail to achieve one of its most important goals if it were to approve an almost 15% increase in police manpower.

If there were a broad consensus among residents that the gang issue was a top priority, the voters might forgive such an outcome. But the fact is that much of the population has been insulated from this issue, and awareness of the problem is low in neighborhoods that have not been impacted by the rise in gang activity. That's not a bad thing, per se. It shows that the problem has been contained thus far. However, it also has the potential to cause a backlash if significant increases in spending are passed to help clean up this festering problem. Hence the ambivalence among Council members.

Whether or not the Police Chief's approach is the right one or the most cost effective one, it is worth noting once the potential costs (financial, social, and otherwise) of shying away from addressing this problem head on. Will additional officers and extra funding make sure that innocent bystanders don't get in the way of stray bullets? Will they end the defacement of public and private property with graffiti? Will they make sure that no part of Teaneck ever becomes a "no go" zone? I don't know. But the potential damage those things can do to Teaneck cannot be measured in dollars alone.

The answer to Chief Tiernan's plan need not be an unqualified yes, but it also cannot be "no way." The time for debating whether a problem exists is long past. The only thing left to discuss are the details of the solution.