Police Report on Mifflin St: End. It. Now.

Here’s the findings and recommendations from their report. I’d like to see a longer comparison besides 2008 to 2011, I’m sure they have the data, the very limited comparison seems strange and seems to leave out a big piece of the picture.

The full report is here.

Findings (Note: QOL = Quality of Life, and also, they spend quite a bit of time telling us why their data is not good data.)
• The total number of QOL and UCR Part 1 Incidents (Figures 1 & 2) display an increase from 2008 to 2011.
o This information is for all of central district and not specifically related to the Mifflin Block Party for 2011.
• Over half (59) of the QOL incidents (Figure 3) that occurred on Saturday, April 30th, 2011 can in some way be attributed to the Mifflin Block Party.
o It should be noted that since there is no universal way to deem an incident to be associated to the Mifflin Block Party , there may be discrepancies depending on who reads the reports.
• While it appears there were the same number of Part 1 Crimes (All/Mifflin specific) on Saturday, April 30th, 2011 (Figure 4) the following describes the differences:
o “Mifflin Related numbers include three University of Wisconsin – Madison Police reports.
o Of the 21 “Mifflin Related incidents that took place on Saturday, four of them were from reports that were completed outside of the 4/30 to 5/1 time frame. Central district experiences a drastic increase in the number of incidents. (both QOL & Part 1 Crimes) that occur on the day of the Mifflin Block Party compared to the other weekends leading up to and directly after the event.

Financial Impact
The over all costs for the event increased from the 2010 event by $42,983.

The costs to date areas follows:
Overtime & Benefits $106,417
Premium Pay $1,294
Straight Time & Benefits $22,653
Supplies $178
TOTAL $130,542

Conclusions and Recommendations
This event continue to present as a large overflowing party, with numerous houses in teh area “hosting” gatherings on the same day. The inclusion of a sponsored stage in 2009 was speculated by some outside law enforcement to have been responsible for a reduction in arrests from the previous year.

Based on the significant increase in arrests in 2010 and increase in overall activity within the Central District related to the 2011 event, it is clear that no one element is responsible for the number of arrests and that arrests alone cannot provide an adequate measure of success for policing this event. Central District command has continuously emphasized voluntary compliance for this event through pre-event education, on going dialogue with the neighborhood residents, and consistent enforcement stance. Additional variables introduced to this year included new sponsors, a single music stage, and the allowance for alcohol sales and consumption on City property within the event zone. This resulted in the free flow of alcohol, excessive consumption, and disorder, injury and violence often associated with high levels of intoxication.

Our overall goal for the 2011 Mifflin Street Block Party was to ensure a safe and orderly environment that prevented injury to personnel and attendees as well as protected by public and private property. As Stated, earlier, three officers were injured policing this event, and officers and investigators responded to two stabbings, four strong-armed robberies, three sexual assaults, three substantial batteries and numerous reports of property damage related to this event. Feedback from officers who worked directly in the event zone consistently noted a greater level of hostility from party goers, and that enforcement was challenging, particularly for the glass ban, due to the enormous crowd size. These officers reported an increase in items, such as beer cans, thrown from balconies at officers and into the crowd, and an escalation of physical altercations as a result of the excessive drinking and limited police resources to address these issues. Given the free flow of alcohol into the event zone, partiers were seen passing around jugs, pitchers, and various other containers full of alcohol. And though the sponsors attempted to shift the focus from alcohol to music, the location of the stage to one end of the event and the size of the crowd made it difficult for people to migrate to the music stage. Instead, most opted to simply consume alcohol in the streets, or at one of the many independent parties up and down the 400-500 blocks of Mifflin St.

Because the permit allowed for alcohol to be sold and consumed in the street this year, an overall attitude of “anything goes” seems to have pervaded not just the Mifflin Street area, but the Central District as a whole. Individuals were observed far from the Mifflin Street neighborhood carrying open intoxicants and/or consuming alcohol on public property. In this way, the event was in essence expanded to a much larger geographical area than was intended or that the permit dictated. As a result, policy staffing in the district was strained both during the event and well into the late night and early morning hours.

The prevalence of alcohol at this event remains an ongoing concern. Efforts to stem the flow of alcohol and minimize it over- consumption have been and will continue to be a focus of the Central District approach to this event. Yet police education and enforcement related to this recurring event issue will not mitigate its impact without the influence of other entities – namely mayor or aldermanic support; the specific sponsor/promoter; landlords; university administrators; and the students themselves.

In the planning stages for this year’s event, Central District Command advised stakeholders that only two options existed with respect to the future of the block party: Either improvements to the event were made to make it safer and to shift the focus of the event from alcohol consumption to music entertainment, or disband the event entirely. For the third consecutive year, attempts have been made through the issuance of street use permits and the implementation of sponsored music stages to shift the tide of this event and to no avail. There is little else that has not been tried, which leaves only the conclusion that the event of this size – with this long standing focus on alcohol consumption – in this particular neighborhood simply cannot continue.