Livable Providence 2000
An Urban Environmental Conference
RESPECTFUL SOCIETY (SESSION TWO)
-
NOTE: Reflecting the crosscutting and open-ended
nature of the topic, these sessions took a different structure than other
conference sessions. That difference is reflected in the change in headings
and corresponding information. While the previous sessions were in many
ways a group polling exercise, the respectful society sessions were conducted
as focus groups. Focus groups are not predictive, but exploratory.
SUMMARY
Participants in this session agreed, with one
exception, that there is a set of social mores shared by all members of
society regardless of race or ethnicity. Those shared values could form
the basis for an effort to address factors that reduce the quality of life
such as graffiti, loud music, drug-dealing, truancy, litter, speeding and
a general lack of respect between neighbors as well as between citizens
and governing officials. This group thought efforts to improve quality
of life should be multifaceted and involve all members of the community
including families, schools, police and all governing bodies.
THE DISCUSSION ...
Approximately 20 individuals participated in this
session.
Quality of life ...
Participants quickly offered the following list
of issues and ideas that came to their mind in response to the moderator's
question, "When you hear quality of life, what comes to mind?"
-
Loud music
-
Gangs
-
Drug-dealing
-
Speeding cars
-
Relationship between residents and city government
-
Friends and neighbors, community
-
Recreation programs for children
-
Community economy
-
Cleanliness
-
Substandard housing
-
"Leave It To Beaver" atmosphere with a 90's twist
(desired by the respondent)
-
Shared social mores ó appropriate behavior agreed
upon by community
During the compilation of that list of issues and ideas,
some members of the group began to express disagreement. A basis for disagreements
was the varied interpretations and values of different racial and ethnic
groups that exist in the city of Providence. The moderator asked the group,
"Do people agree on some quality of life issues?" The participants, for
the most part, agreed upon the following list. (Some as negative impacts
and others as potential goals.)
-
Noise
-
Truancy
-
Drug-dealing
-
Litter
-
Speeding
-
Lack of Law Enforcement
-
Residents do not trust officials due to low knowledge
-
Should be able to trust neighbors
What's causes these problems ...
One person suggested that "ignoring small problems
- like noise and speeding - leads to big problems." That
suggestion drew agreement from members of the group, as did the suggestion
that responsibility was with parents and the "breakdown of the family."
Probing deeper into the group's perceptions
of the causes of individual issues, the responses were:
-
Litter
"It (litter) is a sign of disrespect," one participant
said. "When you throw a piece of litter on the ground you are being disrespectful
of that public space and telling everyone around, 'I don't care.'"
That statement was met with agreement from the entire group.
-
Graffiti
This topic brought emotion to the surface in some
respondents. One woman angrily said she "feels violated" when she finds
graffiti on her property. Others responded that they felt gang activity
and anger were both causes of people creating graffiti.
-
Loud Music
About half of the group felt that loud music was
disempowering and an annoyance. They saw it as a sign that some people
in society do not care and will not correct their behavior.
-
Substandard Housing (absentee landlords)
Many in the group agreed with the expressed sentiment
that substandard housing in essence "gives assumed 'right'
to do whatever they please." Others disagreed and asserted that one culture's
definition of substandard housing may not fit all.
Approximately half of the group readily agreed
that these types of physical conditions of a neighborhood's environment
send signals to residents and visitors about what behavior is and is not
acceptable. The discussion turned to an attempt to identify what causes
social problems such as those already discussed (e.g., litter, graffiti
and excessive noise).
Who's to blame ...
Members of the session suggested the following
six factors they believe are to some extent responsible for the presence
and continuation of the problems identified above. That is not to imply
that there was unanimous consent to the list.
|
Fragmentation of the family
|
Intercultural communication problems
|
Police department
|
|
Residents' feeling in transience versus permanence
|
Lack of empathy, less tolerant culture
|
Lack of connections with neighbors
|
What should occur ...
-
About 75 percent of the participants in this section
felt that doubled fines should be levied against those breaking laws relating
to the quality of life issues discussed.
-
The participants agreed that decibel levels should be
controlled through legislation that regulates capabilities of equipment
on the marketplace.
-
All participants agreed that there is a need for more
support for the community police.
-
Most agree that the schools have a role to play.
-
Many participants agreed that there is a need for more
community involvement and organizing.
-
Enhance recreation and after-school programs for children.
Areas of Agreement ...
-
With only one person disagreeing, the group felt there
is a set of shared values by all members of society regardless of race
or ethnicity.
-
There is a need for action to improve society, and solutions
will be multidisciplinary in terms of involving family, schools, police
and other government agencies.
There is a need for a greater sense of community
that connects individuals to their family and their neighborhood.