When people see a problem, the instinct is to jump straight into fixing it. The noise in the engine gets louder, so we open the hood. The pipe leaks, so we grab a wrench.
Government is no different. Officials identify a concern, gather information, debate options and implement a policy. Sometimes that speed is necessary. But when the people most affected are left out of the conversation, the solution inevitably is incomplete.
That dynamic was on display last week as Pittsburgh officials and advocates discussed the city’s response to large gatherings of teenagers in Market Square. The conversation centered on young people. The young people were missing.
Councilman Khari Mosley framed the issue as one requiring more than enforcement. The discussion focused on engagement, opportunity and giving young people a voice in decisions that affect them.
These conversations need to happen. The people who live and work and visit need to feel safe. Businesses cannot keep the doors open by locking them against disruption and violence. Government has an obligation to respond.
But a response has to be carefully aimed or it doesn’t hit the target. Best case, the intended benefit doesn’t happen. Worst case, there are unintended consequences.
To find the right solution, there has to be a 360-degree understanding of the problem. Simply banning unaccompanied minors from Market Square does not address why the gatherings or disruptions are happening in the first place. At best, it treats a symptom. Understanding the cause requires real conversation.
The way people — and specifically young people — socialize and interact has changed significantly over the last several decades. It is not just that the malls of the 1980s are no longer the gathering spots they once were. Social media allows teenagers to organize, communicate and build communities in ways previous generations never could. The opportunities are different. So are the challenges.
That makes hearing directly from young people more important, not less.
Rutgers University professor Valerie Adams-Bass pointed out the obvious gap. No teenagers were invited to participate in a conversation about teenagers. That is a missed opportunity for a city looking for answers.
This isn’t just a Pittsburgh issue. Almost every community faces similar questions, and they always have. Where do young people gather? How much freedom should they be given? What responsibilities come with it? Communities have long searched for the right balance between safety, accountability and independence.
The answers require not just asking but listening. And you can’t listen to people who aren’t in the room.