Community Policing in Racialized Communities: A Renewed Call for Equity and Trust

It has now been more than three decades since the 1991 Rodney King beating and the subsequent Los Angeles uprising, followed closely by the May 1992 Yonge Street disturbances in Toronto. That moment in Toronto’s history forced a national conversation about the racialization of poverty and the systemic inequities that African Canadians continue to confront.

Although those events spurred debate among academics, policy makers, community leaders, and the police, Canada saw few sustained, structural anti-racism initiatives emerge in their wake.

The Long-Standing Issues: Poverty, Profiling, and Policing

In the early 1990s, a number of key issues rose sharply into public view:

• the racialization of poverty,
• police brutality, and
• systemic racial profiling.

In response, the Toronto Police Service initiated dialogue with the communities most affected. Community policing—conceptually debated since the early 1980s—was introduced as a potential bridge between law enforcement and racialized residents. The Toronto Police Service, tasked with preserving life, property, peace, and public order, began exploring new ways to engage the people it serves.

Community Policing as a Collaborative Model

Community policing gradually emerged as a proactive and relational approach to safety. Rather than responding only after harm occurs, the model prioritizes early engagement, shared problem-solving, and local partnerships. Its central premise is simple but transformative: local problems are best addressed through local solutions, developed collaboratively between police and community members.

For many racialized communities—particularly African Canadians—community policing offered a possibility of rebuilding trust. It created opportunities for frequent interaction between officers and residents, allowing for deeper cultural understanding, reduced suspicion, and more effective, nuanced responses to local concerns. When implemented well, such a model fosters empowerment, encourages residents to voice their needs, and reframes policing as a shared responsibility rather than an imposed authority.

Community Policing as a Collaborative Model

Community policing gradually emerged as a proactive and relational approach to safety. Rather than responding only after harm occurs, the model prioritizes early engagement, shared problem-solving, and local partnerships. Its central premise is simple but transformative: local problems are best addressed through local solutions, developed collaboratively between police and community members.

For many racialized communities—particularly African Canadians—community policing offered a possibility of rebuilding trust. It created opportunities for frequent interaction between officers and residents, allowing for deeper cultural understanding, reduced suspicion, and more effective, nuanced responses to local concerns. When implemented well, such a model fosters empowerment, encourages residents to voice their needs, and reframes policing as a shared responsibility rather than an imposed authority.

Why Has Full Implementation Been So Slow? Cultural Understanding as a Foundation of Safety

As officers gain insight into the lived realities, fears, and aspirations of the communities they patrol, the quality of those relationships improves. Mutual understanding helps dismantle historic antagonism and correct power imbalances that have long defined police–community interactions. Officers often report higher job satisfaction when they feel connected to the neighbourhoods they serve, while communities benefit from crime-prevention strategies that reflect their actual needs and experiences.

In short, community policing creates the conditions for mutual benefit, reducing crime not through force but through trust, communication, and shared commitment.

Despite its promise, community policing still has not been fully or consistently implemented across Toronto. Several challenges persist:

1. Resistance to changeBoth police institutions and community members may feel threatened when old patterns and power structures are disrupted.
2. Cultural and value differencesThe Police Service carries traditions rooted in centuries of Western policing, which can conflict with the diverse, multicultural realities of modern Toronto.
3. Mistrust rooted in historyCommunities that have experienced systemic discrimination understandably approach police reform with caution.

Nonetheless, the concept continues to evolve. Leaders such as former Chief Bill Blair, along with officers like Superintendent Ron Taverner, have emphasized the need for diversity-respecting, bias-free policing that focuses on preventing harm rather than merely responding to crime.

A Necessary Compromise: Shared Power and Shared Responsibility

Ensuring Toronto’s safety requires an intentional balance. Police must be empowered to carry out their duties free from obstruction—but they must also actively open pathways for community participation, input, and co-leadership. Community policing demands shared power, transparent decision-making, and a willingness from both sides to remain accountable.

Toward a More Just and Inclusive Toronto

In a multicultural democracy, the measure of our collective strength lies in how we treat our minority communities—by upholding their dignity, protecting their rights, and ensuring their ability to live without fear or prejudice. Community policing, when implemented with sincerity and equity, is not merely a strategy—it is a reflection of the society we aspire to be.

Let us continue striving toward social justice, meaningful equity, and communities where safety is built on trust, respect, and shared humanity.