The role of park police . . .

The majority of park police duties parallel those of an ombudsman.

By William P. McCamey

Park district law enforcement personnel are often the most visible representatives of the entire park district system. In this capacity, park police communicate district policies, significantly impact the public's image of the park system and could subject the district to civil liability.

Enhancing visibility

Park police arrange hours of operation during high usage times or after closing hours. Their high visibility is designated by various types of uniforms which are intended to generate feelings of security in park visitors.

Many park districts currently appropriate a significant amount of funds to ensure visible identification of park police through badges, signs, insignias, uniforms, decals, weapons, vehicles, red lights and other technologies. The recognition of a marked vehicle or a uniformed officer reassures people that emergency help or almost any form of assistance they desire will be immediately available.

Defining services

It has also been argued that this visibility will prevent crime; however, much evidence would indicate this is not true (e.g. Kansas City Preventive Patrol Project). The need for a form of highly visible law enforcement in park systems is not the issue. Confusion among park administrators, park police, the public and others centers around the duties and services park district police should provide.

Legal authorization

In Chapter 105, Section 330a, of the 1987 Illinois Revised Statutes, park police are referred to as conservators of the peace, and they may arrest any person found to be violating the law. This statute defines in some detail the law enforcement function often referred to as "real police work."

Park police readily relate to this role, which is consistent with their mandatory academy training and with park statutes which discuss arrest with/without a warrant, unnecessary delay, detention and police powers. However, according to John Van Maanen in the Ambivalent Force, Perspectives on the Police, the estimates of time that police spend actually in real police work vary from zero percent for quiet country police officers to approximately 10 to 15 percent for Busy urban police.

Television programs, movies and books have contributed to the problems police and the public have in defining the role of police. All law enforcement officers are portrayed by those media as crime fighters who proceed from one violent crime or use-of-deadly-force-incident to another.

Actual services

The actual duties of park police align with those defined as service or order maintenance activities. These responsibilities are broadly defined, and vary somewhat depending upon the programs and the type of facilities available in the district.

Generally, order maintenance and service responsibilities include administering first aid, assisting the elderly, locating lost children, directing traffic and people, enforcing animal control, ensuring equipment safety, intervening in disputes, etc. Ironically, even though park police spend 90 to 100 percent of their time completing these duties, only one short phrase is remotely devoted to this

Illinois Parks and Recreation 27 May/June 1988

Park police

role in the authorization statutes, "conservator of the peace."

Of course, the lack of a complete description of duties in the Illinois Revised Statutes or in park district policy manuals is not the fault of state legislatures or park district directors. All law enforcement agencies, and specifically park district police, have been increasingly adding more duties and responsibilities. As a result, police find themselves doing more for society than society has a right to expect — and far more than the police may have the resources to accomplish (Richard N. Holden, Modem Police Management, 1986).

Administrative challenge

The challenge to park district administrators is to recognize that the impersonal, legalistic law enforcement duties encompass only a small fraction of the park police mission. However, this does not mean that law enforcement certifications, advanced police training, liability insurance, etc. should not be encouraged.

The potential for death, injury and liability appears to often be inversely related to the amount of time spent performing law enforcement activities. Even though park police perform order main tenance/service activities a majority of the time, their greatest vulnerability to disciplinary action and civil suit appears to be in those law enforcement activities that involve search and seizure, use of force, arrest, etc.

Park district administrators and police should realize that visitors will increasingly expect them to be all things to all people. The police will be expected to fight crime and to take responsibility when the control of people is required.

However, park police should realize a majority of their duties will parallel those of an ombudsman. Those individuals seeking a "crime fighting" career may have difficulty in adjusting to the reality of park district police services.

Park police should be expected to actively pursue crime prevention methods applicable to their specific district. In addition, park police will be expected to implement various programs associated with physical security. Finally, park police should develop a trusting relationship with all visitors, and become friends to the young and to the elderly who frequently use park facilities.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: William P. McCamey is an assistant professor in the Department of Law Enforcement Administration at Western Illinois University in Macomb. He has been a police officer with the Canton Park District for five years.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 28 May/June 1988