>> recommendation, officers families should not be penalized at an appropriate operation of these policies. we are also working to expand this with coverage if an officer's death results from posttraumatic stress and officers are forced to deal with human misery and weakness and sorrow. and that includes the mother killed by a drunk driver, the grandmother beaten half to

death. these are stories that do not have the luxury of turning away but they have to respond situations and take responsibility for it. this is what passes for normal in their report. the work at officers through today take a huge toll on the human mind and body and soul and many of her officers who suffer from it we continue to work to help others and they should receive psob benefits. they should receive these benefits as a result of turn four. i appreciate the opportunity and urge you to consider this as we move forward. >> thank you for your testimony. next we'll hear from jonathan thompson executive director of the national sheriff's association. >> good afternoon, members of the task force, thank you for inviting me to testify.

i'm currently serving as the executive director of the national sheriffs association that represents and each one serves as the chief law enforcement officer for that. chairs are the only of law-enforcement officers providing the full line of services including jail operations in court and security. the officer sheriff is the law enforcement agency most directly part of the officer they serve. i offer this on behalf of the nation's sheriffs on the topics of voices from this field. my written testimony was cemented earlier and offers care. in light of the attacks and last night ambush i would like to

focus today on the role of von forstmann in the larger criminal justice system this task force has been convened with law enforcement in the 21st century. law enforcement does not operate in a vacuum nor should it be examined. to fully understand law enforcement and 21st century, we believe it is imperative to look at all facets of the criminal justice them and the ways in which they interact. equally important is to examine the tools both physical and technological used by law enforcement to uphold the law as well as those used by individuals aching to break the law. social media tools and applications are having a dramatic impact upon the safety of our police personnel in the communities that they protect. for example one application simply and easily allows anyone with a smart phone to

potentially track this of law-enforcement personnel. while that might sound reasonable, we have heard from countless nsa members and their deputies who are alarmed by the dangers posed by this and we applaud the creativity of the companies and individuals for it is they that are creating jobs and growing our capabilities however we are deeply concerned that we are on a slippery slope to undermining our abilities to prevent crimes. as you have heard from 2013 through 2014, 1231 person and persons were killed in the line of duty and of those it is statistically shown that 28 were ambushed by their killers. the recent death of officer remus and his partner of new york city broke the nation's

heart. two men are without provocation or justification they were murdered or assassinated. the possibility that this type of application played a role in these murders is writing to the men and women in uniform. our military leaders would not permit a known adversary to having to use similar applications to track and harm our forces. neither should our elected leaders and most importantly the corporations that build our nation should they be able to benefit these applications. and they are doing so to undermine our society. those that break the law must remain the primary focus in the 21st century. for 228 years our society has steadfastly held principle that we are a nation of laws and the rule apply determines how a

society can succeed. that velocity is what our members and their deputies and their staffing communities are committed to doing. it is too easy to focus the blame of the criminal justice system on law enforcement. our deputies, the sheriffs and officers stand as the face of the criminal justice system every time we put on that uniform. but we have seen how focusing this on law enforcement can have deadly, deadly consequences and we cannot continue to allow media reporting and those with little or no direct law-enforcement experience to blame on forstmann for the shortcomings of an entire site. we believe those that really want to help solve complicated human behavioral problems need to come out of their classrooms and stop using inflammatory and unsupported rhetoric to get their names in the media. in survey after survey the public overwhelmingly supports law enforcement and to them we

say thank you. yet every day the sheriffs and their deputies and the law-enforcement law enforcement officers represented from folks at the table today endeavor to excel at their jobs and avoid the painful or deadly mistakes. the law-enforcement professionals deserve better. they deserve a federal government that supports their efforts this work the community. they deserve the equipment and the training that will help to keep them safe. we cannot continue to ask our deputies and officers to do more with less and that includes those that threaten the safety of our communities. our communities deserve better as well and so the sheriffs know that we expect the highest and

we strive everyday to protect them. and this includes that i urge you, members of the task force remember that law enforcement does not visit a vacuum and that we must look at the entire system and the entire criminal justice system to fully address the problem that exists in the 21st century. on a closing note i want to thank all of you for the time we have put into this difficult task because we appreciate it very much. >> thank you all for your testimony. now we are going to turn to the task force members and i will call upon them in the way that they have had a question. if the question is not directed to you but you want to add something, please feel free to do so than the chief i can see

you clearly and all you have to do is give little indication you can jump in there as well. >> thank you, sir. >> we begin with tracey meares followed by frederic alexander. >> thank you for your testimony. i have one question for the chief and then another question for the panel as well. >> i was very struck by your testimony and i was trying to understand the resource constraint issue. [inaudible] >> i didn't quite understand the lack of resources there. >> the government has an

obligation to fund the law-enforcement programs. >> so if there are not enough resources -- 's is probably a stupid question on my part, but just so i can understand. >> it was the federal agency. >> i don't know if you were here >> that appears to be a vehicular crash. you mention wearing a seat belt and mr. canterbury, you did not. in the first couple of panels we actually asked the question of

what the source of resistance was to wearing seatbelts. so can you tell me what the union organization is doing in particular to help support officers wearing seatbelts? it seems that that along with encouraging officers to drive slower and do a few things could not only address a good percentage of fatalities but could prevent injuries. >> there are several reasons officers don't like to wear their seat belts. one is with a 35 pounds of equipment that they are wearing when they are trying to exit their vehicle very quickly on a scenario i've seen a lot of badges ripped off of uniforms but we do so were the use of seatbelts and we support the mandatory policy of seatbelts.

the likeness we are concerned that if an officer -- and i know from personal experience when that chase is nearing the end it's very common for me to loosen my seatbelts so that i can exit my vehicle very quickly. so a few situations like that are detrimental. and if they're going to get penalized, they don't warn about their own personal safety because they want to get out of the car quickly to handle this scenario. so we did perform in his earlier this year where we did enter a joint agreement and is an organization and we support the use of seatbelts and many other uses well. >> from our end as well we are happy to participate. i know several of the participants have talked about

this as well and support the usage of it. in terms of achieving that goal one of the things that we support in i mentioned in my testimony is called in sensitization of theirs psob benefit. and instead of them being afraid that if they are killed in the line of duty and they had a little recklessness or carelessness with the beneficiaries of the benefit and there is a benefit that the survivors would be enhanced. i don't think that trying to penalize an officer who is now deceased for not wearing his seatbelt -- by taking away this benefit from his surviving

family members -- i don't think that that is going to achieve the goal of this research. >> thank you very much. mr. alexander. >> thank you, sir. you had eluded -- in fact he pretty much stated that some of your officers to patrol territories, you had mentioned that in some ways they are mistaken as police officers were accused of impersonating police officers if you will. could you speak more to that and what you mean specifically as well as what recommendations you have? and secondly my question is for the gentlemen, you made mention to the fact and i think you also made mention to the fact as well that community policing is very important which i'm quite sure that you agree with.

and you recommended that there needs to be more officers across the country. but if you could start, i would appreciate it. >> thank you. what i am referring to in many instances across the country tribal law enforcement do their training and that is not recognized in some of the state certifications and when they come off this in uniform if they are not state certified then they sometimes threaten with impersonating law enforcement officers because they are not state certified and so that is

in some instances that has occurred and is still occurring to this day because of the strain between the political issues between the state and the tribes and sometimes the state and the federal government. >> they have tried to address a where they have tried to have a lot of the tribal agencies receive special law enforcement commissions and what this does is certify them as a federal officer. but to me it gets back to the states recognizing tribal law enforcement which is an issue and still is an issue and again he gets back to the same thing that we try to establish so that officers are helping other officers whether your state or county or local and it is a work in progress and a lot of it is

powerful. and at the end of the day police officer should be recognized as police officers. >> take you sir. >> we have that same issue with federal officers, and as you know there are standards. on the issue, senseless crime bill, we had that huge supporters of the cops program and we all know that at the height we were closing in on a million police officers in the street in this country and the last best guess estimate, with the volume that we have now police officers even in jurisdictions that support the concept of this or probably problem oriented policing, when your call volume is that how you are totally reactive and we

believe that that is a problem. it is also a safety issue and one of the things that cause he officers to go where they normally go because when you are going from call to call and have to break for emergency calls, it puts a lot of pressure on police officers were answering the call is the most important aspect as you know. >> what is your recommendation for that? >> fully fund is to 94 levels so that we have the state and local operation. i love our brothers in the federal law enforcement sector but without 900,000 plus state and local officers they could not do their job. 97% of law enforcement is done by date and local. >> thank you sir. >> next? >> mr. chairman. >> oh, i'm sorry.

>> we echo many of the colleagues comments. one cautionary point i would make and i agree the full funding for the cops we also agree this just to have a better profile, putting a cautionary note out there that as we drive for higher goal of officers and deputies on the force in the field, there is a lagging cost to that and we all have to be very sensitive to that at the end of the day what is the cost and who has to pay it. honestly from the shared his perspective as they are locally elected the costs often come down to county. so we put a cautionary tale a and we recognize most importantly that there is that cost factor. >> thank you all very much. >> i would like to thank the panel for their testimony this afternoon and i would like to

thank all who were able to travel and be with us. thank you for making the effort to skype with us online. you know it seems to me the last several days that we have heard and especially this morning you know, in the united states the unions have been at the forefront with creating safe work oasis developing safety initiatives and implementing wellness plans for their members specifically in policing units have played a role in terms of pals and other unions. but it seems obvious to me that in the states that don't have collective bargaining for police

officers, that might be something that we would recommend. and i'm curious to know if you think that that would be a good idea. >> as you well know the officers that work in nonunion states make 30% less than those that work in states that are unionized and the other problem is that the assault rate and killed in the line of duty are higher than those that don't have collective bargaining. specifically because of what you talked about here, every major improvement for safety and long for law enforcement has been made by the management, forcing them to include programs like this initiative. workers compensation, like our brothers and firefighters have had, it's still not covered by

some regulations in the u.s. so i think that it is vital whatever term you want to use the interaction is vital for the officer safety. >> our group is made up from this around the country. i think that if the state in axis, all it does is provide the option for workers to be represented by the union if they choose to. no state legislature can compel anybody to join in a forced the sheriff to recognize is that the workers don't want one. the other thing that i think is ordered and emphasized and it ties into the same level of resistance sometimes, the related issue of national law enforcement, one of the frequent

criticisms is that while we have this, i can't get rid of a bad cop or a brutal cop or dirty cop and that is just not true. speaking from my own experience from cases where i have worked with lee's officers who did the right thing and then were wrongly accused and those that do the wrong thing and were improperly accused when you had this in place it provides a procedural checklist. and it's very difficult for an attorney representing the officers to try to get that officers job back and here's what the law provides. i didn't everyone, i told him when he was accused of i told him the range of discipline we follow the law and it is very

difficult to criticize or to say that you can't get rid of someone in this position. i think that most of them including those in the agencies that have gone from not having a union representative half for an initial time had distressed when fear and by and large it's easier to manage the workplace if you have a good relationship in places like any other industry, the workers feel like they have a voice in what is going on. >> is having one, quickly. as you look at the recommendations at large the mandates coming down from washington for different jurisdictions as risk we are

very cautious about that and each elected sheriff has an obligation in many counties are represented and many are not. the point being that they are all rent one size is not going to fit all. thank you. >> i wonder if any of you a lot of them have to do with training, organization and we

have access, and some of us have a suggestion that there should be a minimum of this in order to help facilitate and probably it is good for deployment of services and i wonder if you would be willing anyone of you are all of you speak to that especially with you, chief, i actually don't know how the minimum would work in indian country is related to you know, i'm already having a hard enough time trying to understand the logistical and governmental issue. so i think you understand the question.

>> because of his own set-aside grant process him and it is broken down by size of agents the, and i agree that when you have this especially those that are very small agencies, there's a large basis that they have to patrol. but given that it is important and we do not have to compete against larger agencies and we have this system so smaller agencies are working through the process and by three for the larger ones.

>> and if it is not that large, we can address that. >> i see a few competing interests. one is that economies are helping resources, such as counseling and you want to have those resources available before they were so involved and so by increasing the size of the agents he and consolidation, i think that the risk is that we may lose this and when the agency gets larger, i think that it loses some of the ability to

pursue some of the goals that make this successful. and that a larger or consolidated agents need, the risk is that it is no longer, you know the town's police department, this is a regional department that risks losing some of the involvement in connection with the community. >> from a sheriff's perspective we would agree with that. i would add a couple of points that as i said earlier some have different requirements and sheriff's have primary law enforcement responsibility and in most cases they do. but i think that going back in history if you look at community policing that is what they have traditionally done and as you all know, it is being solved at the local and smallest common

denominator level. that is where we agree with my colleague. we just would be very concerned if there was a sudden light in the line in the sand saying there should be a resort of five officers for every 500 people and somehow that would see random and unavoidably hard to mandate an insured is the gate uniformity across a system that we are trying to achieve. >> i think the government's first responsibility is to protect people. matt. the first and most sacred is notwithstanding ms. but minimum staffing levels are something that need to be looked at very harshly looked at. most major cities have 2.4

police officers, mine which is urban has less than 4.5 officers are counting in the jurisdiction. so does cause problems and it reduces the amount of contact community and puts the officers in a much more dangerous situation as well as uniformity in the response like colorado where ptsd is not recognized as a worker's compensation are you. officers can be forced, but they are not designed to deal with this. so uniformity in those areas would be a wonderful recommendation. >> i would just like to comment based on one of my recommendations so that every law enforcement officer could be equipped with a list. some of those that we were talking about there, may be

maybe looking at it in a different level of support than those that were able to come up with the matching funds or don't have the capacity or the focus to apply for the grants to get that. having lots of work at a higher level would be very helpful. >> do any of our members have any additional questions? >> please join me in thanking the panel. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> okay, we are going to take a break until 15 after.

>> good afternoon. our first witness is the executive director the police executive of the ministers forum. please welcome him. >> inc. you ms. robinson and mr. ramsay and the panel. it is good to be here with you again and i would also like to thank our panel members for participating. thank you for the opportunity to offer my perspective on important perspectives of labor management issues. i have held the position for

over 20 years. you have asked me to focus testimony today on building trust and collaboration on labor leaders and elected officials. when we talk about improving policing, the relationship between labor and management is an area that has been neglected for too long area and historically the management have often viewed each other with suspicion and they often see each other as warring factions and treat each other as the enemy. as recent events have shown us everyone loses when labor and management failed to work together. especially those on the street. this way of thinking is fortunately beginning to change. the new model puts an emphasis on finding common ground so that we can work together to achieve goals that we share.

protecting and serving the community more effectively promoting officer safety and wellness and with the support of others, we held a series of roundtable discussions over the past several years to explore the better relationships between labor and management. the most recent was convened earlier this month in washington and as an example of what can be accomplished when labor and management work together at a roundtable discussion last november in philadelphia, labor leaders reached a groundbreaking agreement that calls upon law enforcement agencies to pick up mandatory policies requiring officers to wear body armor and seatbelts. this agreement addresses the concerns of labor and management and represents an important step in protecting officer safety. because of this unprecedented agreement, lives will be saved.

we especially recognize the fraternal order of police and the national police organizations whose leadership on this issue was critical to reaching this critical agreement. at the roundtable a few weeks ago we were able to reach an agreement on the key principles for improving trust and collaboration among elected officials. i would like to today discuss five principles and share some success stories where labor leaders have worked together to find common ground. and so when leaders work together it can lead to real progress, safer communities, police departments that are operating more effectively officers who are professional diverse and satisfied in their jobs and stronger relationships between labor and management and police and the communities. the first principle is for

leaders to focus on common ground on the goals and priorities they have in common. this is an approach taken by labor and management and you can hear from the chiefly drawn talking about that. in the county the officer safety and wellness is a joint effort between labor and management. after a car accident claimed the life of one of the officers, they join together to enact mandatory seatbelt policies and implement more. a sitting side by side they are emphasizing the safety. principle number two is that frequently, seeking each other's input, being transparent, seeking to build personal connections with one another in

places like philadelphia and sacramento and others management and leaders make it so that they don't do this without receiving input from each other. they should be a part of standard training for officers and we all know it how this works with elected officials. plus building trust treating each other with respect and professionalism even when there are disagreements. and this also means that words matter especially when they are spoken through the news media and voicing concerns and leaders should avoid making negative generalizations. this was taken by karen wilson

with which is a model that demonstrates trust and respect. when she speaks publicly about the concerns regarding this, she tries to present a balanced approach. and among those same lines, they try to understand each other's roles and responsibilities and many share many common goals they have distinct responsibilities and they have to answer to different constituencies and have unique backgrounds. rather than dealing with these differences, leaders should strive to learn from one another and understand each other's perspectives. a recent example was in sacramento where leaders had overcome differences. there they met privately to discuss comment each had made following the grand jury decision and ferguson, missouri. though the two leaders have a good working relationship, the comments reflected different

reactions to the ferguson decision and however rather than letting these differences damage the relationship they work with each other and with the police chief to discuss views and learn from one another. finally the fifth principle is important for leaders to talk about this. promoting officer safety and job satisfaction perfect opportunity between labor and management, for example in places like houston at fort worth, police chiefs work closely with those detained support. and in places like philadelphia, labor and management have come together to improve the department's response to a tool that has stressed dangerous working issues. leaders can also improve job satisfaction are working together to negotiate contracts fairly and on a way and from a win-win perspective.

in camden, new jersey, the police chief and union president recently worked together to successfully negotiate a first contract under the reorganized police department. the key lesson that we have learned is that we are all better off when labor management and local officials work together. we hope that leaders across the country will commit to these five principles, finding common ground and engaging in open communication, treating each other with respect, understanding each other's roles and responsibilities, working together to promote officer safety and wellness. by committing to these principles we can overcome the negative 80 of the past and move forward together toward building communities and police departments. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. we will now hear from karen wilson who is the mayor of gary, indiana. >> thank you, cochair professor robinson and to the entire task

force, first and foremost i would like to thank you for the opportunity to join with this group and testify before you today. you are charged with developing recommendations that would be critical to the future of our city and of our nation and it is certainly my honor to add our thoughts on behalf of the u.s. conference of mayors on behalf of those recommendations he would make. i am humbled to serve as chairperson of the conferences working group of mayors and police chiefs which to build a set of recommendations for improving police community relations that we presented to all of the mayors and cochairs,

as well as the active director ron davis, one month ago during the mayors conference here in washington dc. and i would also note that the commissioner did double duty as he was a member of that group. i believe that all of you have seen our report and the recommendations are grouped into six areas police and community trust, improving practices and ensuring timely and accurate communications conducting independent investigations, addressing racial and economic disparity and providing national leadership. i would officially submit a copy of this for the record of this session. in some instances the

recommendations go beyond the purview of mayors and police chiefs call to action by the broader community in cities and nation as the whole and by the federal government. this reflects her belief that improving police relations is not a full responsibility. this includes business the not-for-profit sector civic and social organization police and government at all levels must be involved to ensure not just public safety but just as and equally important is a sense of justice in the community. the topic for this panel is labor management relations adjusting a critical component

of what we must do to build trust between the police and the community they serve. probably to ship in the direction must come from the mayor and police chief, it is primarily the action of police officers interacting with community residents on a daily basis and responding when an incident occurs which will determine how successful we are in maintaining that trust. and first of all, let me register our agreement with the important principle that the doctor has articulated. focusing on finding common ground and engaging in open communication and seeking input from one another handling

disagreement with respect and professionalism and understanding and respecting one another's role and responsibility as well as recognizing the strong link between performer and trant promoting officer safety and wellness in building strong community relationships. last july our concerns about officer safety were underscored when an officer was gunned down in his police car while investigating a call. this in today's testimony throughout today underscores the delicate balance of addressing all aspects of this issue that have been raised and heard by the task force. i believe that our role is to provide police departments with the resources they need to get the job done.

those resources can be money or equipment or something less tangible such as creating an atmosphere that makes it easier for officers to get the job done. we need to look at leasing from various perspectives as we work to create a climate that allows the police to do their jobs. this includes the perspectives of the officers and their unions, the police department as a whole, the city government, and the justice system as a whole as well. and i use my power as mayor to involve the entire community. i have addressed the big picture and work with our chief in regards to law enforcement. working closely with with the chief to improve policing

practices that may be of concern. we have tried to provide a consistent message which is that the overwhelming majority of police officers are doing a great job. we have made it clear that we support our officers and what they do. so long as they follow established protocol. but we also make it clear that one something appears to have been done wrong we will investigate it and act on the finding of that investigation. with every tragedy comes an opportunity and what has happened in ferguson and staten island and cleveland and brooklyn has to be seen as an opportunity for us all and especially for america's mayors. we believe that mayors are uniquely equipped to lead

conversations about the relationships between the police and the community. we believe these conversations have to involve the community as a whole. as mayors we must embrace this opportunity to create a dialogue that is going to serve the city for generations to come. the dialogue about race relations and poverty and about how we in government will engage the community every day of the year including those days when the police must be involved. and i would say that leadership on this conversation is not for the faint of heart and we hope that we will find and that you will find these thoughts and our recommendations helpful as you draft a report to the president and the nation. the conference of mayors stands ready to contribute to this important task in any way that

we can and i stand ready today for answering any questions that you might have. >> thank you. our next witness is the chief of the maryland county police department. >> sharing some quick thoughts it's it's just east of here across the waiver river, a little over 700 people and so it is a lot of ground to cover. and so we are in interconnected community. we have had the opportunity over the last several months to work with doctor wexler around this issue. community policing and the foundation of everything that we do in the county.

because of community policing in the last four years we have been able to reduce homicides by re-% in four years. from my perspective, community policing is about relationships and trust and equity. also internally with our officers. the simple wiki concept and how we are treated internally affects our community. if there is not trust with our agency, how do we build trust in the community. we must treat the officers the way we would want them to treat our community. and community policing begins internally and that is why this is critical, in my opinion. there was a time not too long ago that the police chief and the president would not have spoken or done in the same room together. the last two i have known

personally so there has been a relationship there to begin with. but the initial conversation is that our jobs are different but very much the same, to take care of the men and women in the community and together there's nothing we can achieve together. key elements in building any amount of respect as the open lines of communication and inclusion. we have discussed our concerns and we deal with the little things before they become the big things. it is about showing respect enough to listen even if we disagree. i openly seek the opinion before making any such issues we have

a committee right now with a prominent position on that they are always making a point before they have any kind of suspensions or before anything happens, so he understands these issues. we have a command staff to make sure that there is equity and discipline matters, such things as uniforms and they have a tremendous effort towards ptsd and alcohol related concerns. it is okay if we disagree because it's about finding middle ground. without fighting or openly fighting in the community, which would only erode the trust of the community and hurts everyone. only one time in four years have

we not been able to agree on that. but we did agree at the end it that it would be an arbitration and we would allow together than to make the final decision. and so we find 95% of the time that we are on the same page. probably the best example centers around what the doctor was talking about about these operations. in august 2012 a 23-year-old officer was involved in a fast chase, loss control, he was killed in that accident. three months later a 27-year-old officer was killed in a car accident as well. we stood in the trauma room with their families and we made a decision together right then

that we needed to change the culture of how we have operated our vehicles and we did it together. that is where this came from. we had this and there are many different pieces that we put in place in training and one of the most significant ones was the video that we did of family members that have lost officers who have been killed in the line of duty we stood together in a room much like this and made a plea to the rank and file about operating vehicles and it sends a tremendous message to them. concludes the key components and they are critical in maintaining a healthy and resilient department. when i talk about collaboration,

every level of the agency not just with myself and others, but with command staff and others working that issue at their level because they work at those issues. just like community policing has got to be more than just a catchphrase, it has to be the core of what we do and how we do business every day. conclusion as respect and trust and collaboration becomes a foundational rupture within a police organization between labor and management these values are reflected out into our community that we serve. thank you. >> thank you, chief. we will next hear from jim who was a longtime executive director of the fraternal order of police. >> thank you i appreciate the

opportunity to be here today. we represent various levels and the union guy comes in and tries to eviscerate every assertion. i didn't have much to agree with this assertion and the bigger problem, which we have participated in all of these roundtable discussions and we feel that we have learned from them and hopefully management has gained insight from them as well. and the bigger problem as i see it is not going to be how the participants in those discussions go forward but how we make other local union

president see that there is a better way of getting things done than is currently being done and unfortunately there are a number of cities around the country. this is particularly true in those 20 some states where there is no collective bargaining and there is no required communication and coordination between that and police labor. and so all the power lies within them or within those jurisdictions to decide whether or not he or she wants to interact with labor representatives or liberal at large. and in many of those cases unfortunately they do not. if you look around the country, you will see that the greatest

dynamics between the community and the police is in places where there's poor relations between police management and labor and some of them may be other cities, but we have to take what we all agree upon is a good idea and find a way to sell it. i am not here with the insert that, but i'm just saying that our work doesn't end with that profound recommendation we come up with a plan and we have made other people think it's a good idea as well. and this is a trickle-down. when they feel good about their jobs in the way they are treated in the way he is equipped and trained, he gets out there and

that's going to be reflected in his interaction with the community and the community is going to like it and support it and the resources that are necessary to maintain our level will then be easier to get and so my point is that this is not the end of the line with us sitting out and congratulating one another. because i only have so many fights left and me and hopefully wechsler does as well. we need to move forward positively, make it spread, make able understand that police chiefs are also cops as well. and to make them understand that just because these guys don't have scrambled eggs yet doesn't mean that their brains are scrambled. so with that again i am very

happy to participate in this task force and in this series of roundtables again and i hope that they don't end with a reporter. i hope there is a springboard to action. >> thank you sir. we would also like to thank the officer of the police officers association. >> thank you. i would like to first comment on the fact that we create in large part of the public's perception of local on enforcement please let me define. i mean the police unions police departments and the government. we need to take care of our own house and relationships. we need to discontinue the practice to tear each other down publicly. we have taken on a very

aggressive strategy that we are no longer going to publicly battle with local government. and the real public relations portion of that, the connection to the community we are looking for is if i spent all day tearing down my police chief, it talked about why this is improper or unjust, and i do the same thing to my local government and then i turn to the public and say to trust us, i say good luck with that. and so i would first start with my first recommendation which would be to quit tearing each other down publicly so that we can build a trust by showing solidarity with each other and we have taken on a strategy recently to share the media releases and the long-term strategies with each other, in the city of sacramento they

will actually share their immediate responses with the police union and i have done the same with them. i will share that with them and their staff ahead at times so they can see where we are going and why and also this gives us an opportunity as to why i'm not fully understanding the other viewpoint. so it has given us an opportunity to have a solid public message come out. one of the other things we have tried hard to do is to not indict or generalize, and i note typically that's the police union saying that that is the government and the administration needs to quit indicting them in all of these other things, i do agree with that standpoint. at the same time i cannot indict this if only one or two of them come out with an opinion that i disagree with. and i need to be very specific

about who i'm dealing with and who i'm talking about and how we hope to fix that course of action the same thing we go with the police department, if a decision was made i cannot tear down the entire administration. otherwise i have to really unwind the fabric of trust. so another point i'd like to make is that we try very hard to fight behind closed doors and i can't pretend to say we get along at all times and that it's the perfect relationship. below we try to do is take advantage of the fact that -- i don't use the media but use my personal messaging system and the other things i can do to tear down the trust or two talk about a we have work so hard to build. so i have the ability to meet with my chief very frequently

pretends to be a personal or down and then also i bring my executive board together with the deputy chief every month and sometimes others will join us as well so we have a joint feeling and message of where we are going forward. and i have that same opportunity with the mayor and my counsel to meet with them and typically meeting with them one-on-one face-to-face and we all have the same general goal in this portion community. until we are lucky that we have this for contract enforcement as well. what we have adopted is the idea of policy and the practice of that policy that will allow us to let it rule.

or if we are in disagreement with this, we let the neutral third party make those decisions and i don't go after the city government over it. i allow the process to run its course and let that third-party arbitrator use the evidence of accidents and presented to them to make those decisions and that has really helped in so briefly we can touch on a we share every policy through this first, creating a great amount of trust with the officers because they know that they are vested through the association and the same policy and there is a specific way that it is laid out with what will happen, what

parts of that incident, and it is available for public viewing until it's a pretty high level of trust between the department and the government and union and then attaching a community trust over to a transparent policy. one lesson that has helped with our department is they have trained a number of our officers to do what we call peer support. most of them have lived through dramatic incidences within the police department themselves. so when you come talk to me about this incident we know the process, we know what you've been through. that program obviously all the way through this incident you will have that support in-place and then the last thing that i would say is that most recently by a leader that said some of

the things, i wish we had some of those in the city but how do we get there because we been so bad for so long. the honest answer is that someone do take a leap of faith. until somebody burns you there's no reason to no longer trust them and there's opportunities and there can be a leap of faith that we will be able to get together and collaborate. and so my primary concern is to support this and i thank you for your time. >> we thank you, mr. smith. turning to questions from the panel, we are going to start out with each individual speaking. >> thank you. >> good operation. my question. please can you tell us about the disciplinary review committee

and how that works? >> the committee meets quarterly and reviews we have the law enforcement bill of rights and the state of maryland there is a set process and this [inaudible] making sure that we look at what has happened over the last three months, making sure that there is equity what you got and i did the same thing as well and i got less than you did. so it is about keeping equal across more for everyone and it's made up of members from the staff and the group will rule if

it's equitable or not. >> if it is not what happens? >> then it stands. what is the difference if we have a reprimand or a fine. we have the specifics of the case and i was somewhat reckless and my handling of this and they may deem that, you know, that it would stand. if they say this is not equitable, it will come to me. >> and you have the opportunity to change it? >> yes ma'am. >> a totally separate question, we have talked to the previous panel about mandatory seatbelt wearing. how did you overcome that and what were the couple of key things? >> like i said early in my testimony, the real push came

down the second time after standing in a trauma room with the family and us coming together, understanding the state as well we have to come together not necessarily in a disciplined way but as a peer pressure pure pressure way and this is what we do. somehow, like i said, the first officer was 23 the second one was 27. they grew up with seatbelts. all of a sudden they had 18 months on the police department, all of a sudden he decided he couldn't wear a seat belt. [inaudible] this is not about you. it's about your family.

and so we took a strong peer pressure point because if we are all on the squad you know who has a seatbelt and who does not. so it has been tremendously effective and we have a whole series of things that will put in place, we went to ups to see what we did about driving safety and we have a message that comes out three times a day from the dispatcher and it changes every day as far as seatbelts and speed, being distracted and there is a host of things. and the interesting thing every cruiser marked or unmarked marked in the same place in the car. and it basically mentions the three things. but it has a picture of the

police memorial. so it's personal. but i had an agency that one of the roundtables so there is no way that i could have a sticker put in the cruiser without them saying okay. basically saying that they would never allow me to do that. it is about coming together and it is about partnership and sometimes it takes a tragedy like them saying that there is opportunity in every tragedy and for us it has hit us back in 2012 and we seized it. and i that was one of the key pieces of it. >> so the key was peer pressure? >> yes. >> and that has really been the key, putting it out there and allowing them to show each other

who is accountable. because it's a very stressful time when you have a lot of duty in this way kevin wasn't working at the time but he was in a cruiser and those types of things ripple through the entire department and the entire community. and when you have a crisis like that you have to seize the moment. >> thank you. >> officer, do you have any thought from the office or prospective? things that would overcome the arguments against wearing a seat belt pack. >> we have had a mandatory policy for quite sometime now. i think over time the training officers involved have come from a different generation with a different message and sometimes i believe that that will help. i know that i have trained a number of folks that have come

out of the academy and i personally preach the use of seatbelts as much as i can. [inaudible] whereas if you get to the training process you fail if you don't wear it. if it starts at that level i think it can help carry off. ..

>> >> it is easy to say it suggests start with you but isn't it a little more complicated than that? i think this is really important so of you could say more about your strategy would be helpful because we know you have a great relationship on the distribution of better than

those. your we are brought you here with twice the monthly meetings with your police chief but someone not starting from a position of relatively good relations there are more concrete things you can say how you let it start with union representatives and if you take give ideas about a strategy? like to dig your membership on board a. >> that's a fair question in. we have our own constituencies and people sometimes try to over cater. they expect the public official to be the first and that will weigh very heavily edited is to the city manager so they will make

certain decisions and i have to take that into account as well. but what helped is to j. kelly of faith to continue down this path without falling prey to the vocal minority or the membership is that there is no real threat as the union leader like somebody else takes my place that i go back to making this save money in of weeks. over life would be really happy. so it was upon me and i organization in my board that it is not one size fits all but it is an easy decision to make. we have sometimes said is

the best thing. and we have continued to bring people up so when i meet my chief for the first time it was just before that. but the trust has already been building over the years. saluted his is a leap of faith not just myself because it is also my board

that is the message they want to carry forward the. >> faq for your words of wisdom. but i'm trying to figure out something maybe more towards officer smith. and we agree we are working together but you touch jon that everyone has a constituency that their work for. and the people they purport to. in with union leadership they remember that a party of droughts in that has to come at all cost. and that is why when i have seen things where richmond has known that the union

knows if it will with the officers and content ashley problem that could i have your perspective to how we deal with it? >> every day we see lawyers go for confirmation before the senate is day are challenged through said defense attorney but everyone is entitled to a defense. rated is not difficult if we share the responsibility. you are right to. from time to time could

possibly a was termination. bet the defense presided by the union. and it is equally possible that officers you should have been retained were dismissed because of the prosecution by management. but if for betty has a job to do it and nobody whether a police officer or firemen with public service coming checks the id due process rights that the station house door. it is part of the job they do it as vigorously as we can spend a heck of a bite to respond to that as paul.

over the past few years with a high profile case we have always taking nephew .3 nondefense attorneys if there is the accusation made of things we will typically see of internal affairs with a reasonable settlement or it will be appropriate. if somebody does something terrible could technically we don't represent but he fitted betty has offered support what skidway do to

help support you as well? so i guess it is pretty simple to say to the brave thing for the reasons. we usually don't defend those a have done something terrible is society if you have been accused within the scope of your duties but it is the al my job to defend you. >> i sensed there was not another question. it sounds like what officer smith is talking about when he says take a leap of faith to do the right thing for the right reason bed ate what he really talks about is the depth of leadership.

so what is he doing to our accentuate the leadership problems by officers smith? >> probably not be enough. it is leadership the probably the biggest challenge i want to tear pick up your question or the comment of how do you change the dynamic? the best way to change it is with examples that people see the benefit. officers and labor and to management work it together. id camden they get an agreement on a contract. and then the lives are

saved. when they agreed to the mandatory wearing of seatbelts lives will be saved because people are required you normally think it is uncomfortable and their life will be saved because of that. leadership is umbels sides it is both labor and management and in boston were item from we would say branded -- management gets the kind of union they deserve so if you treat people badly the union gets more militant and i think the best example here is sitting at the table with philadelphia and their union. not to say it isn't still strong but now there is communication.

a lot of this is leadership and its video socratic with the right personality. i have seen over and over whether labor or management that we have a new union presence -- president and now things are battery have a new chief doesn't think their goal is to talk to the union so if you have the new union leader or a new police chief who doesn't have this kind of experience, they think they are supposed to treat the union a certain way and they think the year to treat management a certain way. like kidder not this is what my friend was talking about about, if they have to get elected to bad mouth management publicly vent that is what my friend from

sacramento is talking about with character. make a decision with the job is really worth become a different type of person to get reelected? we need to do more to educate chiefs and union presidents the you get more working together. if someone steps outside in this is disrespectful that changes the dynamic but the days of the public paying for management and unions with a no-confidence vote, space is safer because of that. we have a lot of work to do. people talk about changing the culture of policing the have you do that without cost?

jesus can do with by themselves. somehow we need to recognize the cops are not the opposition said chiefs want to be happier to treat the community better. talking about a proponent of procedural justice we need to have that within police departments. unions came about because people would be transferred overnight because they would look the wrong way. but all of these things that we have done in the arbitrary way when it is a new day we will disagree sometimes to be more accomplished to be at each

other's throats. >> ironclad the u.s. the question. i did not want to remain in the air. but the one to weigh in on this again? >> it is very discomforting to agree. [laughter] but here i am. >> we could keep off the record. [laughter] >> appreciated. what i wanted to say is let's go sell it. that is what we have to do. the for the last will for 14 years have put up well leadership seminar for the newly elected officers as a

four day seminar and we try to teach them how to attract with management and how to message to the members that they understand what they're doing and how to interact with the of public event is the incremental process. it will not happen overnight but if you look at cities and we talk about cooperation and collaboration, the city we point to is cincinnati. basically they were forced to the table by the justice

department specifically eaters said church leaders the city government. they went kicking and screaming and did not like gaffers but they had to stay there in the overtime they came to realize the only way they would never get away from the table is to make something happen and so they would work together cooperatively. cincinnati isn't perfect but it is a much better city today they and it was at the beginning of the process. press the working together for the betterment of the city. but one of the leaders was one of the biggest critics.

that naacp leader reenforce city council with the endorsement of the fraternal order of police. now is the proponent for resources for police. that is the evolution that can happen when and we were close to make that have been zero or probably less but more often as we move around the country. >> thank you so much. please join me to think our panel. [applause] >> welcome back at this time we will get community feedback. we have no on-line comments as we have speakers from the audience.

michael dell? >> i am here today with every civilized but my christian stew you is in case of the conduct of the police our friends if you see a police officer round you should go to him or her. with that is not what happened to whereby a son

was brutally murdered at the hands of the police. up until now so evidently there is the problem. pledged african american?

is is worse than ever. it was the worst injustice ever if he does not deserve to die like that. if you do the fact check it is like they're working together like has spent and wife. >> thank you. this says about a question is a dancer period i apologize about your response but i do ask for an outstanding bumpers that you can reach with after words so we can refer you to use sources but we're not in a position to actually responded to comments.

>> good afternoon. i made a trip down from wisconsin my flight was a king and sold and in to sell some for i had dead 21 year-old alliance still under a spotlight her rand i've tried to work with law enforcement. has a retired colonel i flew the and then immediately after 9/11 but my first response was but it'd is in

a very sure each period of time so that is not the case. so we ended up winning a settlement and i spend my and then to spend my own money for the independent we are of but i know the way i kept myself will live in those that a trade with by tci and lessons but it led to its success pahang le kef a handout -- handout.

>> you are still alive. i am so sorry. but the governor signed up portion of the lot to be first in the nation. i did not get that done by myself but i worked with law enforcement as it is part of the solution but i recognize those elements of aviation and were not happening with law enforcement and therefore to try to change portions of that, i asked for data and there was none. i said let's see the dash camera that was withheld. ask for further investigation to be sent back through that community and it was not happening. so we fought very hard and i sat down at the wisconsin

all - - wisconsin professional police association and jim palmer and i sat down to kraft legislation together and i gave it to the representative who was the chief deputy sheriff and he worked hand-in-hand with a human-rights advocate and together over the course of several months ahead we got through the whole process. one thing that is very important is talking about officers' safety today. one committed suicide in 2010. sometimes the killer of people just like in the military but that officer might be alive today. but me processing the

emotions to lose a son there is an officer of family medicine in she spent 20 years developing in that it called it a motion based training and earlier today the chief said she would work with ptsd and i strongly strongly strongly recommend to take a demotion based training. because you want your officers you don't want that said the motion and to go into depression. >> and strongly to a bill looked at. if anybody needs to contact me look on the back of the

handout i think there is e-mail address bet you can also correspond with me through telephone. >> faq. that is not a short trip but please give your card to the young lady behind you to make sure the task force has all the material that you have. no other comments from the audience? >> there is another full day of testimony and once again this has ben remarkable to bring intelligent testimony to us. the day has been full but it has been extraordinarily helpful.

>> i just want to thank everyone who will provide oral testimony with those to simply watch over the internet or television. your input has been very important as they move forward to present a final recommendation. i want to thank the cop staff with the short timeframe keeping up with what has been to when on providing feedback along the way to make it easier to put together a report with a short period of time. and those that provide the staff support to thank them for everything they have done.

we have interpreters there throughout the day with all the different hearings of deaf and hard of hearing and we appreciate them being here so now we turn over to the task force members. >> the one do think the staff for all the work they do to help us with this important work for crown could this whole process of the task force but there is

always a unique and creative and a different ways to do this same goals that we have. in to gather as much of those in one document or strategy to put out the best practices for the nation will be very helpful for individual agencies looking at how to address in those jurisdictions. i'm hoping the like at the end of the tunnel is not a trade. [laughter] has been a rewarding experience. >> so coachers thank you again so thank you for

another day of testimony something that is very near and dear to my heart. so with the recommendations to witnesses today was not known a great testimony and rationale soto turned into the final report final -- very easily. with the task force dedicated to officer wellness and safety through due process rights than procedural justice that carried throughout the witness's testimony today.

on behalf of law enforcement. >> travel a jump on the bandwagon thank you for your support and though i cannot -- alcoa that i appreciate the discussion of the internal procedural justice that is the key to employ on the street. fait que to the two parents that came today and i expressed my deep condolences for your loss per card cannot imagine and i admire you to have the strength to share your story and keep sharing and so we can keep getting better. nobody wants this to happen. thank you for coming. i really appreciate. like my fellow panelist

thank you for coming in and the contributions of those of your of the public who cave near and far too our deliberations. i said earlier today that hurt people can hurt people's watches -- officer safety and will list is not important just for the officer but also their families in the communities that they work. so it is about community safety and wellness it is important to spend the time thinking about this issue as important as all the others that we have discussed so far. has become to the end of this to sink my fellow task numbers in addition to the great leadership of the

cochairs we have been able to do a lot of great work together. we don't necessarily agree but we know how to work together in a way to have a document that would be useful for the nation. >> i a bad coat many e of the staff and do the cochairs who kept us focus tandon task. and for those who provided testimony today on this critical issue redo agree that hurt people can hurt people's wishes of collective importance we have this discussion and i appreciate the clarity of the st. suggestions today and all of those to follow along with a view -- what we

thank you. need to explore making the richard papergirl i think your continued example reminds us of the urgency of this conversation and should not cost lives but it needs to continue so does it cost more lives. faq for reminding we've personally why i am here. >> '01 two thank everyone to came out today and everyone who's that on the panel

kelso one to think that when you say your son would still be alive today if he were white, i feel that it came at the moment that we are to go whenas a task force that we put on the president's desk next weekend i hope this serves as a reminder that we need to have the conversations we have been having an to the context of race relations. so thank you for coming year or sharing as a story we

have a lot of of work to do with this task force and i am committed to being here and working with you all and hopefully next week when we bring the report to the by house that is the first up on this journey to create a process of what is wrong in this country. >> that we heard it all from with the evolution more importantly than anything else is history is good of

all the tales are the news conference to have lost their children without a sense of understanding. and banbury go from here through hours of testimony that each could this will be meaningful coming forward. i truly believe that. and to the breast of this country as well. is true the past to be about change because it is the eighth hole took issue and then bent and and to believe

the laws changed the policing that is long movement to. and a stage you for being here and also thinks to the leadership in the support staff and contractors with everyone involved with this process. it is more than a pleasure and this is something that will carry with me with the rest of my life. thank you to help being made to grow and develop to be a better human being. thank you. >> i will think my staff and the support staff. this is now the end so now face to the great leadership of the cochairs with the

hearing sessions with the panel of policing. there is no better way to do rap of this part per car want to thank the panelist for coming. thank you for sticking with us for artist anticipation it was a reminder for the president and the attorneys general that the gap the recommendations for the field that young men of all colors have fair treatment when they step out of the house but the president made it clear that with people rigorous support a hint it is not as simple was gunfire.

so with the balanced trajectory so of a diversity of the witnesses we are you bon dash able to agree without being disagreeable. i hope they will embrace the a motion it will be in a historical moment because of the progress today and looking forward to where we're headed as the country, a community leaders to come together how to a

dance forward and it is what it is all about. and thank you to the cochairs and the staff for send everyone participating thomas' staff, a tactical of pfizer's, and i want to thank them now as we will work them over the next couple days so please accept the things that we are eternally grateful for your of leadership. >> with that we wrap up the session and b will have the last listening session. thank you.

>> urging congress to go past what has bog this town we have one example of that right now that unless congress acts were the 100,000 employees and tsa agents will show up to work without getting paid. these are folks if they don't have a paycheck cannot spend that money in your

state. it will have a direct impact on your economy and on america's national security because their hard work helps to keep us safe. governors you know we cannot afford to play politics with national security. . .