Opinion: Editorial

We’ll keep the light on for you

With safety being one of the most important concerns on the minds of students, any initiative on behalf of university and city leaders to combat crime is worthy of recognition. Such is the case with a recent initiative by Ald. Eli Judge, District 8, to improve lighting conditions for residents of downtown Madison. The Downtown Residential Lighting Initiative, as it is called, provides grants for downtown property owners who wish to install lighting around their residences to ward off potential intruders.

We wholeheartedly agree with Judge’s proposal. While the city of Madison is facing difficult budget cuts and any new spending should be viewed with caution, the low price tag of the initiative — $50,000 — is a small price to pay for what may amount to significant improvement in downtown safety. As Judge indicated while discussing the proposal, both the university and city police departments are strong advocates of increased lighting in the downtown area as a crime-fighting measure.

We are also impressed by the fact that the DRLI places little burden on property renters or owners. The proposal does not mandate that downtown residents provide lighting outside their homes but rather provides them with the opportunity to do so if they feel it is necessary. In this way, the proposal serves to delegate some of the responsibility for safety onto residents themselves. Additionally, despite a 5 percent decrease in the overall Madison crime rate, burglaries have increased over the past year, and while it is essential that the Madison Police Department remains vigilant, students, many of whom are downtown residents, have a pertinent role to play in preventing these crimes of opportunity.

We hope that, in the budgetary fight that is certain to ensue as Madison’s City Council looks to cut programs across the board, this sensible and cost-effective proposal will be given an opportunity.

Have a thought? We welcome your input, but please be polite and stay on topic wherever possible. Your comment may be deleted if it is inappropriately off topic or promotional or if it is unnecessarily rude or contains personal attacks. We may delete comments for other reasons as well. Just keep it simple and focus on your points as respectfully as possible.

We allow and encourage comments employing satire, wit and irony to make points. Do not flag comments just because you disagree. Flagged comments will be immunized from further flagging unless they stray far from the guidelines and do not add to the discussion. Before flagging a comment you think is offensive, consider your time might be better spent rebutting it than censoring it.

blog comments powered by Disqus

2 older comments

user-pic
Much so-called security lighting is designed with little thought for how eyes -- or criminals -- operate. Marcus Felson, a professor at the School of Criminal Justice at Rutgers University, has concluded that lighting is effective in preventing crime mainly if it enables people to notice criminal activity as it's taking place, and if it doesn't help criminals to see what they're doing. Bright, unshielded floodlights -- one of the most common types of outdoor security lighting in the country -- often fail on both counts, as do all-night lights installed on isolated structures or on parts of buildings that can't be observed by passersby (such as back doors). A burglar who is forced to use a flashlight, or whose movement triggers a security light controlled by an infrared motion sensor, is much more likely to be spotted than one whose presence is masked by the blinding glare of a poorly placed metal halide "wall pack." In the early seventies, the public-school system in San Antonio, Texas, began leaving many of its school buildings, parking lots, and other property dark at night and found that the no-lights policy not only reduced energy costs but also dramatically cut vandalism.
user-pic

The above person misunderstands what is being proposed. Private lighting has been founded by numerous cities as effective to reduce both crime and costs. While expensive street lights cost millions of dollars and in some studies increase crime, small lights in dark alleyways is necessary so that students are not blindsided and are aware of their surroundings.

In addition, you can cite all of the anti-light studies you want, there are hundreds — perhaps thousands — on the other side that support strategic light initiatives as suggest by Alder Judge.

Donate