Current Proposals Under Discussion

This section contains proposals currently being considered by the Marmion Way Neighborhood Watch members. Please review and provide feedback through designated channels.

---

Proposal: Exploring Private Security Patrols

Date Proposed: [Insert Date Proposal Was Made]

Status: Under Discussion / Information Gathering

1. Introduction & Problem Statement

Despite ongoing efforts, key issues like illegal overnight RV parking, late-night disturbances/suspicious activity, and speeding persist, particularly during late-night/early-morning hours. This proposal suggests exploring the feasibility of supplementing resident efforts with professional security patrols during these times.

2. Proposed Solution: Targeted Private Security Patrols

Investigate the costs, benefits, and logistics of hiring a licensed and insured private security service for targeted patrols on Marmion Way during specific high-concern hours (e.g., early morning, hours TBD).

3. Goals and Objectives of Security Personnel

The primary role is Deterrence, Observation, and Reporting:

• Deter illegal overnight parking and late-night nuisances through visible presence.
• Professionally observe and log violations, suspicious activities, or hazards.
• Report documented issues appropriately to city agencies (Parking Enforcement, Police Non-Emergency).
• Immediately contact 911 for emergencies.
• Enhance residents' sense of security.

4. Proposed Operational Details (Subject to Investigation & Funding)

• Patrol Hours: Focused on early morning (Exact hours TBD based on quotes/cost/need).
• Patrol Frequency: Daily or adjusted based on cost (e.g., 5 nights/week).
• Patrol Path/Method: TBD (Vehicle, foot, or combo, focusing on identified hot spots).
• Visibility: Uniformed personnel, possibly marked vehicle.

5. Proposed Methodology of Engagement (CRITICAL)

• With Residents: Professional, courteous, non-interactive unless approached. Not personal security.
• With Potential Violators:
  • Primary: OBSERVE AND REPORT ONLY from a safe distance.
  • Minimal/No Direct Confrontation. Do not enforce or detain.
  • Verbal interaction only if company policy allows AND situation is safe (highly discouraged as default).
  • De-escalate if confronted; disengage safely and report.
• With Authorities: Report non-emergencies via designated channels; call 911 for emergencies; cooperate fully as professional witnesses.

6. Potential Benefits

• Targeted deterrence during peak problem hours.
• Consistent monitoring.
• Professional documentation and reporting.
• Potential reduction in nuisance activity.
• Increased peace of mind.

7. Considerations and Challenges

• Cost: Significant expense requiring collective resident funding (voluntary contributions model needed).
• Effectiveness: Deterrent, not a guaranteed solution; activity might shift.
• Liability: Must use reputable, licensed, insured company.
• Guard Quality/Oversight: Requires careful selection and clear protocols.
• Community Consensus: Requires broad support and financial commitment.

8. Next Steps

1. Gauge resident interest in *exploring* this option further.
2. If interest exists, form committee to research security companies.
3. Obtain preliminary quotes for various service levels.
4. Explore potential voluntary funding models.
5. Present findings (quotes, funding options) at a future meeting.
6. Neighborhood decides collectively whether to proceed.

9. Conclusion

This proposal is a starting point for discussion on potentially adding private security as one layer of our strategy. Thoughtful feedback is requested.

Please share feedback with [Contact Person/Email Address] by [Feedback Deadline Date].