In a two-and-a-half week period, University of Tampa officials issued three safety alerts. The first was placed on select residence hall doors and e-mailed to the community several days after the incident. The second and third were both sent out as global e-mails to the university community within one-and-a-half days of the incidents. The method of communication and timeliness of these alerts continue to raise questions.

The first safety alert dated Nov. 2 involved an incident with a Yellow Cab driver who was trespassed off campus by UT Campus Safety and Security sometime on Oct. 31. According to Charles Mascenik, director of Campus Safety and Security, trespassed means that the individual has been served with a trespass warning, and if he comes back to campus, he would automatically be arrested and sent to jail. The postings on campus were not on “official” safety alert paperwork and were not stamped by the Office of Student Leadership and Engagement or Residence Life.

Later, UT officials issued the same alert over the plasma screens.

The second alert dated Nov. 8 described two off-campus robberies. One occurred along North Boulevard, where four UT students were walking and one was robbed at gunpoint on Nov. 7. The other occurred somewhere in the vicinity of the Metro Mart where a female student had her debit card stolen and sustained minor injuries on Nov 8.

The most recent alert dated Nov. 17 involved an on-campus physical assault of a female student while walking near the Sykes Chapel construction and the intramural field early on the same day.

According to the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, or Clery Act, all Title IV universities and colleges are required to issue timely warnings.

However, neither the Clery Act nor the Department of Education (ED) defines “timely.” The document only says that the alert should be issued when the most important information is available.

UT’s Timely Warning/Safety Alert Policy is consistent with the Clery Act and ED simply not defining what is timely.

“There are no hard and fast rules about the way you treat a safety alert,” Rod Plowman, vice president of administrative services said. “It’s decided on a case-by-case basis.”

Plowman says there are several considerations taken in account when issuing a safety alert including: the facts surrounding the issue or crime, the possibility of an ongoing risk to the campus community and whether or not UT would be compromising the investigative efforts of law enforcement by issuing such an alert.

Plowman also stated one of the underlying concepts of the timely alert is to notify the community about the incidents and aid them in preventing similar types of crimes.

The Clery Act does not specify what information should be included in an alert, but it is up to the individual institution’s policy. UT’s policy states “information about the alleged crime, posting and expiration dates, and recommended safety prevention measures” should be included in these alerts as well as UT Security contact information and ways to report a crime.

UT’s policy also states that alerts will be issued by UT Campus Safety and Security when the vice president for administrative services and the dean of students feel that the crime is serious.

These crimes include criminal homicide, murder, manslaughter, sex offenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, arson, hate crimes, and similar criminal conduct.

Plowman sees an issue with the Clery Act and its definition of timeliness.

“[It would be] beneficial for the education department to have a more clear cut policy,” he said, but thinks it is still difficult to get all the important information from the major offices on campus, as well as Tampa Police. This plays a role in how “timely” the alerts are.

“We get it as close as we can and still try to get it out on a timely basis,” Plowman said.

Depending on the incident, UT officials circulate the alerts where they think it would be most effective.

In terms of the safety alert about the cab driver on Nov. 2, UT officials only felt that it was more pertinent to the resident students and that it wasn’t necessary to notify faculty and staff.

There is still a discrepancy determining whether or not a global e-mail was sent out in reference to the cab driver.

Eric Cardenas, director of public information, believed that a global email was sent out to students concerning and describing the incident and referring to safety alert online, but The Minaret could not confirm this.

Kelsie Huth, Student Government president, also believes that the alerts should be on a case by case basis, but that the proper channels need to be informed.

“Everyone that should be notified, needs to be notified,” Huth said.

Another concern is the victim of the crimes reported. UT officials have found that victims are reluctant to report the crimes if they know an alert will be issued on campus.

UT officials are trying to find a more discreet way to alert students so victims won’t be discouraged from reporting crimes.

“This is a process and we are evolving as we do it,” Plowman said.

Cardenas said that they are working on a button that will be on the UT homepage directly linking to the safety alert website. Currently, UT community members must click on “Safety and Security” and then “Safety Alert” to retrieve the most up-to-date alerts.

The UT SMART (Spartan Mobile Alert) system will only be used for emergencies.

“We don’t want to use SMART unless something’s really wrong,” Plowman said.

Other universities like USF use their text messaging service like SMART for activities and advertising.

Cardenas explained that all PCs on campus are capable of receiving desktop alerts.

“As new technologies develop, we utilize them,” Cardenas said.

Charlie Hambos can be reached at charlie.hambos@gmail.com.