ral holder and so many others. i look down this road here good friend carol stevens across, you all have been very concerned about this issue for a long time, and i thank you for featuring the attention on it today. i want to put this issue in some perspective. the distinguished panelists before me have done some of that. .. died from other causes. 840 of them by the way from heart attacks, job related harte attacks. over the last decade we averaged

over 146 officer fatalities per year. that is a shocking number. one officer killed somewhere in america every 60 hours. all right. but the good news is that numbers are going down. if you go back to the 1970s we were averaging 231 officers killed in the line of duty each and every year. that means the 146 number i cited is 37% lower than it was 40 years ago. that is at a time we have double number of officers serving and putting themselves at risk. would you have expected that number would have gone up, not down. there are a number of factors that are responsible for that and i have enumerated some of them in my written testimony. i want to just spend a moment though re-emphasizing the leadership that the attorney general of the united states eric holder, has focused on issue of officer safety and wellness.

i'm not sure he is getting enough credit for his leadership. just a few years ago, when deaths were spiking, 171 officers killed in 2011 he held a summit in his office with about 40 law enforcement leaders and actually took notes himself about what we could do to reduce officer fatalities and injuries. he launched a program called valor, which provides important training to officers how to prevent violent attacks and how to survive those attacks when they do occur. he create ad national officer safety and wellness group which i'm very proud to be a part of. it is jointly under the auspice of the cops office and bureau of justice assistance. this has done tremendous good training more than 15,000 officers across the country. finally he increased the federal grant money gone to groups like ours and others who are focused on officer safety and wellness.

those are some great examples of leadership he has provided. i don't think it is any coincidence the result of all those efforts the last two years we've seen fewer law enforcement fatalities for any year than the last 50 and that is a great credit to leadership and to this group and so many others that are focused on this issue. but a lot more work clearly needs to be done, all right? i look at canada as a great role model for us here in the united states. i have attended their memorial service two out of the last three years. three years ago they honored all of the officers in canada who had been killed in the line of duty. one officer one officer killed in canada during entire 12 month period. last three years they have always been below 10. so i asked the toronto police chief, bill blair, a couple years ago, what were some of their secrets of success and he enumerated several.

they have guaranteed arrival program decreased crashes by 70%. get the call for service safety, first and foremost. then you can render assistance. mandatory seatbelt and best wear policies wee seeing much more of here in the united states. sensors in vehicles checking speed and seatbelt usage along with incar cameras. the officers know that they're being watched for safety compliance. it makes a difference. aggressive education campaign showing officers what happens in a crash when you wear a seatbelt and when you do not wear a seat belt. it is pretty impressive and makes a difference. a officer safety committee meets once a month to look at injuries accidents, fatalities. figuring out what we can do to prevent them in future. progressive promotion of move over, slow down. something thankfully with nhtsa

and us and many other groups, we're getting public aware of the move over and slow down laws. we need to learn from our neighbor to the north. consider these troubling statistics. last year we know 24% of the officers killed in the line of duty were not wearing body armor. 32% of the officers killed in auto crashes were not wearing seatbelts. 55% of the officers who died in auto crashes were killed in single vehicle crashes. and 15 officers were shot and killed in ambush-style attacks last year. that is triple the number from 2013. the other problems that we've identified thanks to a cops office grant, officers failing to wait for backup entering dangerous situations alone. many officers crashing their vehicles while rushing to assist a fellow officer. officers being killed with their other than weapon. weapon retention is still a concern and finish issue we need to address.

here are the recommendations some of them, anyway that we talked about the national officers safety and wellness group. we must have a unified safety message with involvement and buy-in from both management and the unions. you have heard that said before and i'm sure you will hear it again later today. hire a safety officer like they do in fairfax county, virginia create a safety committee. establish a national clearinghouse for best practices. doing and we are doing this now in conjunction with the bureau of justice assistance. we call it destination zero. let's get number of injuries and deaths down to zero. that should be the big audacious goal we all can rally around. reduce distractions for officers in their vehicles. take a data driven approach to safety. if it matters measure it. officers and elected officials will be much more easily influenced if you give them data to support the safety policies. bring families into the safety

mersaging. create an environment that rewards officers for safe behavior. most importantly perhaps of all. change the culture. do not accept injuries and fatalities as just part of the job. thankfully, i think, the best news of all is that that culture change has started to occur. with your leadership this task force and your recommendations that i'm sure will come out of this we'll do a lot better as we move forward. so thank you very much for this opportunity. >> thank you. thank you so much. i'm going to start out the with questioning with brittany, followed by sean smooth. -- smoot. >> thank you all very much for your testimony. my question is for lieutenant eastman. can you hear me? >> yes ma'am, i sure can. >> thanks so much. i really appreciate your testimony and some others, regarding training for hemorrhage control and other trauma instances. my question really about the

policies surrounding that. if the train something available. i'm wondering how we can help to mandate reasonably expect that officers use it, even if the force is, the officer's cause? so we saw there was failure to provide that kind of support for tamir wright in cleveland and antonio martin in missouri where i'm from. once the train something fully provided as it should to your excellent point, how do we create policy insuring that is provided even potentially of the victim of officers lethal use of force. >> i think that is a great question. the answer is when you train people to do this, we haven't seen them withhold therapy in agency that had that training. in my own experience i have been a part of, unfortunately several uses of deadly force as part of the dallas s.w.a.t. team even members of the team before i could move 20 or 30 feet to the

victim were already deploying some of these skills. we've seen officers use force in the field and subsequently holster their weapons, move to the suspect insure they're safe, begin treating them immediately. so i think answer is, if you build the capabilities, the officers will do the right thing. but i think it is important to build in policy and procedural expectations to give them the legal protections they need if that happens. but i don't think you're going, i think you will be impressed with the dedication of the law enforcement officers who are train to do this. look at the boston marathon bombing. those officers had no official hemorrhage control program in boston. several had taken it upon themselves. when they were faced with one of the biggest challenges of their career, they acted and treated everyone no matter what. if you, not to use a pun, but if you build it they will come and these officers will use this stuff appropriately. >> thank you very much.

sean smoot, followed by tracy mears. >> thank you, madam co-chair. i have two questions. one, for you, dr. eastman. first of all, thank you for interrupting your vacation to participate in testifying before the task force. if you know -- >> you're welcome. my wife is watching that, thank you. >> thank you, mrs. eastman. doctor, if you know, what would be the cost on a per officer basis to equip them with a downed officer kit as you described in your testimony and the requisite training to use that kit? >> yes. so, you know cost, it depends on scale, right? so if you go large-scale, you're going to talk about less than, way less than $50 an officer. i think, it would be up to the manufacturers of that equipment and those companies to deal with us on a scale pricing. if we're talking about a nationwide program i think that price would fall significantly. we're looking at nearly a

million law enforcement officers in the united states. in terms of the training, we don't exactly know how long the to train people for it. it is my belief we can do this in couple of hours. in the dallas police department we have a multimodality training program where we start the officers with some online video viewing. they do some very shorthands on training and then we incorporate downed officer kit into many scenarios during the course of training cycle. the officers get not only didactic training but get hands on and incorporate in other things. i think you're looking at realistically a couple of hours and significantly less than $50 an officer. >> thank you very much doctor. if i could switch to chief cost store for a moment. -- chief castor. chief, you talked about, the safe haven house thaw set up and

your citizens police academy program and you also talked about your front porch roll call? >> uh-huh. >> which you mentioned in your written testimony as well. so i have a two-part question for you. i don't usually do this, so probably getting evil eye from some of the other task force members but with regard to the safe haven house and your citizens police academy, are those things that you budget for out of your operational budget for the department or does the city support those programs by giving you additional appropriations to do them? that's number one. number two, could you elaborate a little more how your front porch roll calls work. >> yes. actually the safe haven that we have for the kids is a second one we opened up. we have had one in another high-crime area for about 12 years. we just opened up a recent one. one of my assistant chiefs went to leadership tampa through the program and took an old parks

and recreation building and they rehabbed that as a class project. i assigned police officers to both of those safe havens and officers that i assigned have a background in education. so they're very well-received and accepted in the, in the neighborhoods. as far as the operational budgeting for it i will say this hopefully my hair is not watching, but the city takes care of the operational costs in it for that safe haven. as far as the front porch roll calls, those have been a great way to connect with the community. citizens can call in and request those. roll calls and it has been very, very successful. the squad shows up at someone's front yard and they usually feed them which seems to attract police officers very well. then they, they get to meet the police officers that literally is patrolling their neighborhood. and they create those

relationships and those bonds. >> is that roll call similar to what they would do in the station? >> that is exactly what they would do in the station. you and i are so old they would have the roll call board but they get that through mtbd. they read out bulletins, who is wanted, what to look for in the community. the community gets to feel a part of police department. >> thank you chief. >> tracy mears, followed by sue roor. >> good morning, everyone. this is really interesting. really him -- illuminating. my question is for you, mr. floyd. i was going through the data you listed in your testimony pretty carefully and as i understand it there was very welcome news that fatalities are down except that, towns like at least in recent years, the greatest contributor is accidents maybe,

vehicular accident, if i'm getting that correctly. i wanted to focus on number of injuries. in your written testimony you said something about the fbi saying there were 100,000 injuries, officers injured in the line of duty. i'm wondering about the relationship between that 100,000 number and the vehicular accident point that you brought up? and seems to me that we, not only save a lot of officer deaths but injuries if we could simply convince people to wear their seatbelts. so i'm wondering, what the, in your view is the hurd dill? is it just culture? is it something else? is there there is no union representative on this panel. is it union resistance? if you have some insight on that, that would be helpful. do we need to put a nine-year-old in the back seat? i know when imdriving my car my

son says to me mommy, put on your seatbelt. what can we do here? >> well, couple of things. one, that the number of more than 100,000 injuries actually is coming from the bureau labor statistics. one of the problems we have, i think it is talked about in some earlier testimony and will be emphasized later we need better data on injuries. i'm working with a group called the police foundation. one of our board member organizations, they're doing a study on near misses. what we are doing here is we're collecting a lot more data or need to collect a lot more data on injuries and near misses because those numbers are going to be so much freighter than fatality right? we can tell you everything we want to know about fatalities especially the deeper dive we're doing with the cops grant. i will tell you it is a cultural issue, seemingly. i'm not a practitioner. i defer to my distinguished panelists here but clearly in canada, as i emphasizes they

have this program that they emphasize from day one in the academy and every day after. that is guaranteed arrival. when you get that call for service, whether to back up another officer respond to an emergency, don't put yourself in the peril that some officers here in the united states do. it is a wonderful thing that our officers are willing to put their lives at risk for other people. but, it is foolish when you drive so fast that you wreck your vehicle before you ever get to back up that officer or help somebody in need. and that is i think, what we talk about, when we talk about a culture change. we're starting to embed that message into the minds of officers at an early stage in their careers, at the academy. we're professing that over and over again during their careers. we've seen it in a lot of agencies now that do have mandatory seatbelt wear policies. the unions have bought into it. and they are working with management to impress that

message upon the officers. and as a result i think we're going to see the numbers of injuries and deaths go down dramatically. without question, traffic related deaths and injuries are the most preventable of all. >> i want to jump in real quick here. in this regard because in recent years i have had two law enforcement officers who died in the line of duty in vehicle crashes. what i find, i have a fleet of about 1800 vehicles and we drive a combined 25 million miles on annual basis. when we look at our traffic crash data, what i see sometimes is a disproportionate number related to distracted driver. my deputies are on cellular phones and they have the mobile data terminals in their cars and so we have embarked on a campaign of training and education aol campaign about how not to do that we're taking advantage of bluetooth

technology in our vehicles now so that we not predisposed to looking away from what we should be down the roadway. we are going to biannual training now. all of my deputies are required to have vehicle driver training every two years. and our ultimate goal is to reduce number of traffic crashes. we do have a mandatory body armor policy within our agency as well. >> may i just chime in on this i'm sorry you can't give you any non-verbal cues i would like to answer as well but -- >> you can wave your hands or something. >> i was going to hold up a sign but i'll tell you the point that craig made about a culture shift is really important one. let me add to that discussion. you described in your question these vehicle accidents and i

will tell you as trauma surgeons we don't ever use the word accident. an accident is a act by god you know you throw your hands in the air you have no idea how to prevent this i can tell you these are law enforcement vehicle crashes and law enforcement injured in crashes and crashes are preventable. again to go back to the point of building a database we don't really know if it is speed, if it is seatbelt if it is vehicle design, if it is our equipment we wear but again building a database to capture some of these pieces of information and allow us to study it scientifically, will help you design programs to prevent crashes. that is the whole idea behind see belts and airbags and all that. people studied vehicle crashes to learn how to make vehicles more safe. we need to study law enforcement and learn how to make that job more safe as well. >> chief, do you want to weigh in on this too? do you have a policy and what is your experience with the culture

in your department? >> actually i always talk about the seatbelt rule. i think that's something you have to i use that as analogy for everything else. the seatbelt rule you have to constantly remind people because it's a habit they get into. we do have policy mandated wear and we haven't had any accidents where officers have lost their lives. i can't tell you unequivocally that all of my officers wear them but we definitely have a policy for that. another that alex hit on very lightly, that i believe is an outstanding program as far as the vehicle crashes would be concerned and officer safety in general that was touched on very lightly is the near-miss program that jim berm man and the police foundation put together, we mirrored that after the firefighters near miss program. that will pay great dividends in the years to come if officers put information into it.

if we don't get any data it will not be a benefit but i see that as saving lives going forward. >> okay. we turn to sue ro hr followed by jose lopez. >> thank you. dr. eastman, i want to do a little deeper dive what sean smoot asked you about the down officer kits because i think that is one of the smartest things to do. i'm putting that together, does it have to be doctor or firefighter teaches that or can that be done credibly after trainer to trainer? >> definitely can be taught to someone trainer after trainer. you have to get credible instructors. you have to understand the principles behind what we do. i have 3700 officers in dallas. i don't train every single one of these classes. i build a cadre of officers to train these guys. i talk to the guys and tweak the program. that has to be trainer to trainer model because we have million people to train.

if you don't deliver it to a train to trainer model you will never get this done. >> can i do one more question real quick? >> yes. >> i was really appreciative, dr. eastman, you talked about peer review and looking liability protection for doing those reviews. i know in my experience people are very, very reluctant to do those because there sills a pending lawsuit. are you aware of anywhere in the country where those protections have been implemented successfully? >> not in law enforcement but they're implemented successfully in all 50 states from a medical standpoint f we have error in the operating room at park land, the physicians responsible for the error are still held responsible in a court of law but we're able to discuss that in real time, usually in the same week to make sure that error never occurs again from another physician. that is the whole idea of peer review. doctors reviewing the care we provide. just to bring this example home

we have a an officer in dallas who was killed in the line of duty when he approached a vehicle that contain ad murder suspect and set his weapon on the ground to break out a window to try to get this guy out of the car. that dash-cam video is out there right now. we got it. we used in the our own academy but every police officer should see that video to make sure they don't ever do the same thing. we lost one life that way. why should we ever lose another? because with simply because we haven't gotten the legal protections in place to allow us to have a frank discussion about what happens on a nationwide level. that is a lot about the what near-miss project is about to bring those lessons to the forefront in a identified way so people feel comfortable at least putting the lesson out there but with some legal protection you could really improve the way that law enforcement officers learn from each other. >> thank you. >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you. let's turn now to jose lopez,

followed by roberto. >> so my question is for chief castor. i just wanted to hear a little bit more about the first-responders retreat. wanted to know a little bit about focus or curriculum. what are the areas that you cover during the week-long retreat. information around scale. so how many officers are tappedded through the retreat annually and some information around the the val -- evaluation process and how evaluate the impact of the program from the officers who use it. >> we lost two officers on a traffic stop in 2010 were shot and killed. i had a conversation with one of our police chaplains, sister ann doherty, how i felt we didn't do enough, i couldn't do enough for our officers to deal with the trauma that they are exposed to on a daily basis. and she was able to go out to

another state that had a type of a first-responders retreat and brought it back to tampa. she had the fransiscan center in tampa. so the officers, the retreat is held at that location and officers actually go there for a week in house and they have to probably, the most traumatic portion of it is, give up their cell phones when they walk into the retreat. but it is, one of the downsides is each group, each week is only six to eight officers that can go through it. and they have a series of group sessions where they get to talk about traumatic experiences that have followed them throughout their careers. one of the things they find is they're not alone. everyone has the same feelings and issues that they have regarding trauma that they have experienced. there are a series of psychiatrists who volunteered their time to do the emdr that

was developed for servicemembers. and that i actually went through the retreat myself and, the emdr was described to you, you would say there is no way that works. but if you actually go through it, you would find it truly does work. so that, and then we have a series of presentations on the the physiological effects of trauma and how to deal with that. i personally was confidential, would choose officers to go through it. you can imagine how excited they were that possibility the first question is, what is wrong with me? how commie? but i asked them all to come and meet with me afterwards. almost to the person they have said that it is the best experience they have ever had in their career. they wish they had it earlier and would like to see all officers go through it. unfortunately it is very expensive. we've been able to put it on through donations so far.

there is a lot of in-kind time donations from the practitioners. we have, it has been in effect for a little bit over a year and we put 68 people through it so far. and, i'm, have all of the information i can share with anybody who would like more information on it. and usf, i left out the one part university of south florida is following the process to look at how successful it is. they have been keeping data and statistics on it to date. >> thank you. your last questioner, will be roberto senior. >> i actually because of couple questions from fellow panel members, both my questions were already answered so i real quickly developed one other one so i don't look like i'm not

involved and this is for dr. eastman. you talked about the lioca does not give us granular detail we're looking for and i just wanted you to expand a little bit on that. as law enforcement manager we look attack call issues and how it happened and what was the situation. you kind of touched on it a little bit about accidents, crashes and speed and so forth. could you expand on what type of granular detail you would be looking for. >> absolutely. if you look think about the detail that is collected right now, i mentioned a little bit, how far am i from the assailant? is it light, is it dark? was i wearing my body armor? what was the assailant armed with? if i want to know as trauma surgeon, what was injured. did the officer die because he bled to death from arm wound that need ad tourniquet or does the body armor not cover a piece of our body that leaves us

vulnerable for injuries or deaths? does the car crash that killed this police officer and yet crashes wouldn't be in concluded in the data set. it is not a assault type situation but if we have officers getting stabbed, fatally stabbed or injured seriously, are those wounds the result of bad tactics? what are those wounds are they treatable. all those things are be a sent from the data set. a number of people trying to employ work around for this problem. we're talking with lioca now about updating the questionnaire for the next -- the timetable is look, i'm a trauma surgeon and a cop. i'm impatient as can be. i don't do things on five-year turn around where i would run for congress okay? [laughter] so i'm not ready to wait another four years until the lioca data set is updated again. we've got to do this now and take the impetus you all put

forth as r task force in the president's office and generate legitimate data set that can help us answer some of these questions. >> thank you. >> thank you so much. please join me in giving our thanks to this terrific panel. [applause] really appreciate all of you come particularly with the weather problems. and, doctor we're going to be jealous of your out there on vacation and enjoying your time out there. >> i will be skiing. thank you very much. >> okay. let me turn things back over to our director now. >> so at this stage we'll be breaking for lunch. the next panel three will be at 1:00. want to remind the audience those watching during the break the task force will not deliberate on items discussed today. let us enjoy a good lunch. for the tech people, obviously this one worked a lot better. thank you for making it work. we look forward to the same this afternoon. we'll see everybody at 1:00.

great panel. thank you, guys. [inaudible conversations]. >> c-span2 providing live coverage the u.s. senate floor proceedings and key public policy events. and every weekend booktv now for 15 years the only television network devoted to nonfiction books and authors. c-span2, created by cable tv industry and brought to you as a public service by local cable or satellite provider. watch us on h. did, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> more now from the white house task force on policing. coming up we'll hear from the president of the fraternal order of police. this panel is an hour. >> thank you, sir, and welcome

back everyone. panel three will focus envoyses from the field. we're going to begin with another distinguished panel. we have one on skype again. this is we'll start with chief zachary. the public safety director woodway, texas, immediate past president of international association of chiefs of police. yost, good to have you. >> thank you sir. [inaudible] members of the task force on 21st century policing. thank you for allowing me to testify today. my name is yost zachary. i'm director of the texas public safety department and immediate past president. i'm sorry i can't join you today. my flight was canceled. -- 1979. i'm still there today, and

currently serve as chief and director of the public safety department. one of my main duties as a chief to insure the safety and well-being of my officers is there. this means making sure that they have a proper training and equipment they need to do their job safely so they can return home each and every day to their loved ones. during my time as president of iacp last year, officer safety and wellness was one of my top priorities. and it is always been a top priority of the iacp it is a position of that organization that no injury or death to a law enforcement professional is acceptable. being a law enforcement officer has always been a stressful and dangerous job but currently the law enforcement community is up against even greater pressures, challenges and violence. police officers face and witness profound danger on a daily basis. each year there are more than 50,000 assaults on law enforcement officers which result in more than 14,000 officers being injured this past year. this past year, 126 were also

killed in the line of duty. following am bush attacks on law enforcement officers also increased in 2014. 15 officers nationwide were killed in ambush assault, matching 2012, the highest total since 1995. it is imperative we provide the training and equipment to help prevent morphia salts and injuries from ambush attacks. such programs as bbp, bulletproof partnership program are resources to enable state and local law enforcement jurisdictions to purchase life saving vests. it is imperative this program be funded and reauthorized with adequate funding. physical wellness is a huge part of officer safety. a fit officer will be able to serve his or her community better and provide better support to his or her officers. imperative wellness within departments and encourage officers to get regular physical

checkups and exercise frequently. iacp center for safety and wellness can be a resource for law enforcement in this area. the part of reducing officer injuries initiative. iacp released impact of fitness and weight on injuries fact sheet. reducing officer injuries, final report which highlights the importance of physical well-ers in. recently iacp also released two resources examining the importance of officer nutrition. pocket guide for patrol sisters providing healthy on the go meal options and fact sheet written for law enforcement leaders to encourage nutritional guidance as part of formal and informal training. we know things such as bmi do matter on police officers. officers must be able to run, defend and shoot and physically fit sister can do that much better. in a. mental health issues and threat of officer suicides are often

top picks few are willing to address openly or candidly. the iacp in conjunction with the cops office held a national symposium on national law enforcement officer on suicide and mental health. this report was breaking the silence on law enforcement suicide. this promotes culture of change so that seeking a mental evaluation is a as common and routine as that of a physical ailment. lastly it is important that all departments provide guidance so their officers, especially new recruits coming in. not only do they need to provide them with proper equipment and training but they need to give them guidance in the areas of both physical and mental health. in addition each department should be clear to clearly demonstrate it has certain rules and procedures in place and in no way does that mean that a department will defend misconduct. all officers should be held accountable for their actions. every department must establish internal affairs policies to deal with potential misconduct.

if misconduct occurs the agency should already have measures in place to investigate and address such behavior. the intake process for taking these complaints must be accommodating for the individual registering the complaints that they feel comfortable and they are kept abreast of happens. this will send a strong ethical and professional message to all the staff both sworn and civilian. recent report on iacp building trust between police and citizens they serve internal affairs promising guide funded by cops office stresses that and helps build relationships within the community. again i want to thank you for convening this very important listening session and for the opportunity to express my views on officer safety and wellness. it is imperative we provide the proper support for law enforcement officers. they put their lives on the line each and every day to protect our communities and insuring we have the proper training equipment and support we can

give them both medically and physically to keep them fit will make us better at our jobs. i welcome any questions. thank you for this opportunity. i apologize i was not able to make it there in person. >> thank you for your testimony chief. next we'll hear from die an bernhart executive director concerns for police survivors. [inaudible] hold on a second. i don't think your mic is working here. we need to get her mic up. okay. all right. >> okay. test. >> got it. >> on behalf of concerned police survivors, also known as cops, i want to thank you for asking me to speak to a topic very important to our organization. cops is 30-year-old organization with the mission of building family lives and coworkers affected by line of duty deaths. cops represents 30,000 family members and affected owe

workers. we provide peer support and navigating benefits available to them. we provide long term services to families and officers as long as they need them. cops also provides training to law enforcement through our signature trauma in law enforcement training where we train officers on the handling after line of duty death but spend a great deal of time training officers on strategies to proactively maintain their mental health and wellness throughout their career. to provide strategies what we see way too often which is an officer taking their own life. the voices from law enforcement survivors constantly repeat same thing, effects of each officer lost are felt forever. we saw a rise in number of officers killed by gunfire. even one officer killed in the line of duty results in rippling of grief through the family and agency community. we have four recommendations for this task force. first we recommend a nationwide effort to focus on mental health

needs of current law law enforcement as far as. we ask our officers to witness and intervene in the most unspeakable acts of violence and dysfunction in our society. the cumulative stress associated with this can be devastating to those officers. through training such as cops trauma and law enforcement trainings, peer sport programs and assistance programs officers can be made and officers can get help they need. second, we recommend strong policies in police agencies. a bullet resistant vest should be provided to every law enforcement officer. there should be strong language and policies requiring vests be worn. during my experience as a police officer my coworker was shot in the chest from point-blank range with shotgun and her vest saved her life. i'm glad our agency could afford body armor. sadly this is the not case with every agency. lack of funds should never be a reason an officer doesn't have basic protection. there should also be strong policies governing officers driving and realistic driving training. we lose too many officers behind

the wheels of their patrol cars. we recognize officers have to respond quickly to emergencies and that accidents are sometimes unavoidable by these officers should also be making decisions through an educated personal lens with their own safety a factor to also be considered. third, we recommend stiff penalties for those who assault or kill law enforcement officers. in a time when there is much attention to be gained by those who commit crimes shocking the conscience, there is an almost perfect environment for a cop killer to use the media to gain attention, to combat this there should be little consideration of parole when an officer is killed. there should be heightened penalties for assaults on police. many in our society see being assaulted as part of the law enforcement job, as a country we shouldn't stand for this. we have to combat this belief sending a strong message to those that make this choice. fourth, we recommend that nationwide effort to re-establish law enforcement as noble profession that we all know that it is. over the past six month our members have watched as law

enforcement officers have been stereotyped in the media in many of our communities. police memorials have been vandalized, even as recent this past week in colorado. all of law enforcement, even our nation's best and bravest officers have been called brutal and unprofessional while the vast majority of our nation's officers would never consider anything but being professional. officers have been second-guessed and scrutinized by those with months to consider all the possible actions an officer could have taken while the officer only had seconds to consider his actions. the consequences of not constant negative attention are far-reaching. besides the demoralizing effects it may have on our current officers our nation's future police officers are watching. during a time when the recruitment of quality officers is already an increasing challenge we can expect even more challenges. we should see communities focused, we could see communities forced to hire those looking for a job, rather than those seeking a professional law enforcement career. results of that as you can imagine could be just

devastating. law enforcement is indeed a noble profession. there is honor to the fact that these families loved ones died in protection of us all. when law enforcement profession is sign of honor and integrity to our society there will be less -- on our officers. thank you for allowing me to address this task force. each officer we talk about during this very important work that we're doing is much more than a statistic, part of a family agency and community and each life is important to us all. thank you. >> and thank you for your testimony. next we will hear from robert bryant chief, penscop nation. >> good afternoon members of the president's task force 21st send dry policing. my name is robert bryant chairman of the law enforcement eastern tribes law enfores month committee. i've lived my entire career as

law enforcement officer on tribal lands. this provided me as unique challenges working in indian country. men and women are often asked to perform duties and responsibility outside norm of profession due to inadequate resources. as police officers we perform these additional duties with limited training resources, or compensation. this often comes at expense of the overall wellness safety and family needs of the officer. when looking at tribal law enforcement agencies across the nation, it is typical to have only one officer per shift with ratio of not more than two officers per 1000 residents. with violent crime across indian country double and sometimes triple the national average, tribal officers safety is of great concern due to the reality of these low staffing ratios. to help address our issues of low staffing and inadequate resources we continue to work to establish mutually aid compacts with local, county and state

agencies to assist our officers. however these efforts often fall short. this was never more apparent than during the incident in january of 2013 in which a tribal officer was shot and killed by a suspect at the non-tribal officers who initially responded as backup left the scene leaving the tribal officer to defend himself. officers are expected to be the ones who respond to traumatic scenes of death and tragedies, however, due to low staffing, we are asked to return to patrol without adequate personal support to work through the trauma. tribal officers often suffer from undiagnosed post-tramatic stress, alcohol abuse, an failing physical and mental health. i, as a young patrol officer experienced this personally when responding to two suicides of hangings, of people that knew in my community. i never received any type of debriefing for counseling. this is not because of the lack of willingness or desire by the tribe to officer each, such

support but due to inadequate funding and resources. officer training remains insufficient throughout indian country. we are unable to send officers to off site locations because of lack of replacement coverage for shifts. we are unable to afford the high cost of bringing training to the reservations. this inadequate training greatly impacts our quality of work and creates dissatisfaction and mistrust from the people we serve. in addition, the problems of inadequate funding in low staffing ratios the bureau indian affairs is also stretched too thin with limited number of drug agents. with the current state of drug addiction and illegal drug trafficking throughout tribal communities this is troubling. the southeast region of ibia drug enforcement program have seven drug agents that cover a area from maine to florida to new mexico. this create ad safe haven of sorts for drug dealers leaving officers frustrated and being blamed by tribal leaders being

ineffective and combating drug epidemics prevailing in our communities. another issue is high officer turnover. nowhere is the turnover rate higher than in tribal law enforcement. this turnover is direct result of many issues i outlined had this testimony. i offer the following recommendations to the task force. one, tribal law enforcement salaries must be competitive with neighboring municipal county and state agencies. two, the authority and tribal community knowledge of tribal law enforcement officers must be respected by officers from local, county and state agencies. there are many instances which tribal officers are accused impersonating law officers when they are off the reservation. three, resources must be dedicated to tribal law enforcement programs to adequately staff and resource strong tribal law enforcement departments. four, a training program must be designed for the unique circumstances and realities of being a tribal police officer in indian country. five police academies across

the country need to incorporate a mandatory tribal cultural sensitivity training component for all cadets. six, law enforcement executives must receive training on the importance of mutually aid compacts with tribal law enforcement. this should include grant incentives with additional dollars eye awarded to hose who partner with tribal law enforcement. they must have resources to provide counseling a debriefing to officers that respond to serious traumatic incidents. bureau indian affairs needs additional appropriations to fulfill trust obligations by insuring adequate funding of tribal law enforcement programs and hire enough drug agents to begin to truly address drug enforcement needs in indian county of the on behalf of the penobscot indian nation and southeastern tribes i thank you for opportunity to share my thoughts and recommendations with you. >> thank you very much for your testimony. next we'll hear from chuck

can'ter bury, the national president of the fraternal order of police. >> good afternoon, miss ramsey police robinson, staff on 21st century policing. thank you for allowing me to come back a second time to testify before this committee. soon members about task force will begin to write the final report and we expect it will contain recommendations for improving policing at all levels of government. i want to take this opportunity to offer some safety priorities of the fop that we would love to ask that this task force take into consideration in their report. first, i spoke about the need for federal hate crime legislation to include, for law enforcement officers at inaugural session of this committee. so i'm not going into details but of the 47 firearm deaths in 2014, 19% were officers killed by ambush by an individual or pair of individuals that were looking to kill a law

enforcement officer. i have a appended a brief description of these attacks in my written testimony. if their objective had been to kill a muslim a black man, a transgender woman they could be charged under hate crime legislation. we don't see any reason they should not be held accountable when they target a police officer. i hope that this task force will recommend that the bulletproof vest partnership program be reauthorized by congress. this program has one simple goal, it proposes to increase number of officers wearing soft body armor by providing matching federal funds to purchase body armor. one issue with body armor is, it does not live forever. it must be renewed every five years. there is no legislation no government program no grant, that can erase the sad fact that law enforcement officers will die in the line of duty and now more than ever we see our officers in the cross-hairs of these criminals but this program can document more than 3100

officers whose lives were saved because they were wearing soft body armor. how many other government programs can document their success so starkly? the house passed twice this legislation by nearly unanimous margin. we hope this committee will recommend the passage in this congress. we also hope that the national blue alert bill a system for local, regional national dissemination of time sensitive information to help identify a suspect in the event that a law enforcement is killed in the line of duty will pass in this congress as well. both times this bill has been blocked by a single senator whose recent retirement i welcomed. the legislation would leverage current amber alert system by using existing communication infrastructure to disseminate immediate sensitive information to enlist the public's health in identifying the whereabouts of dangerous suspects. while more than 20 states have adopted some enforcement of blue alert, there are large gaps in

the system and national program is vital to fill those gaps. had the assassin who executed officer ramos and liu in new york had not taken his own life and took flight a blue alert could have been issued to get the public on notice and enlist their help in tracking down this killer. the fop worked closely with congress to change the bill so that a blue alert could be issued in the event of a clear and imminent threat to law enforcement officers. i expect this legislation now named in honor of ramos and lui to be introduced in congress this week. i hope this task force will recommend the passage of that by for the last 20 years community oriented policing has been at the very core of policing and crime fighting strategy but when crime rates are down and budgets shrink, there are less officers on the street. those who are on patrol answering calls for service and are unable to engage in

proactive community oriented policing. community oriented police something a labor intensive undertaking and can not be done effectively with the reduced number of officers on the street. since 2009 federal state local law enforcement assistance program funded by cops and other administration by the bya have been drastically reduced. this administration and law enforcement community has a lot of faith in the cops office and its mission. we also know that community policing works. and i urge this task force to reaffirm a national commitment to community policing strategy and we call for the full funding of the cops office. in 1988 the brutal murder of edward byrne in new york was like too many of the attacks we're seeing now, ambushes of police officers. but that killing commissioned in commissioned by an incarcerated drug dealer who wanted to enhance his own reputation by killing a cop, led to the realization that our

local and state officers and their agendas needed more resources. with that, the edward byrne memorial just tis grant program was established. and quickly became a cornerstone, federal crime prevention and crime fighting programs. enabling communities to target resources, to their most pressing local needs. the inherent flexibility of the program allows state and local communities to address the needs and fill in gaps created in the criminal justice system but since fiscal year 10 the byrne program has been reduced by 1/3, causing serious restriction in reach of the byrne jack funded programs across states and territories. if additional reductions are made successful programs will be pulled from the field partnership with the federal state, local, tribal law enforcement will be further weakened. hundreds of communities will lose a range of critical grant funding and their public safety will be compromised. i hope task force will be

endorse the program and keep funding at fully funded level. i would like to endorse testimony later today by chuck wexler. with respect to the importance of open communication and mutual respect between labor and management. ongoing dialogue with the shared public safety goal is a must. even if in absence of collective bargaining, that said dialogue between the rank-and-file should compliment, not supplant the collective bargaining process. in closing i would like to thank you for allowing to us be here today. we are very encouraged about the response that this committee has received from the law enforcement community and we look forward to working with this group to enhance public safety and public service in the law enforcement community. thank you a lot. >> thank you very much for your testimony. next we'll hear from william j. johnson, executive director, national association of police organizations. napol. >> thank you, commissioner

ramsey professor robinson, members of task force. i appreciate the opportunity to provide information on the topic of officer safety and wellness. i will focus my remarks on due process, labor management relations and equipment safety and officer stress. we fight for nationwide law enforcement officer bill of rights for procedural due process for our law enforcement officers. they are held to extremely high standard of personal and professional conduct however many officers are denied the same basic due process rights that other citizens enjoy. many states lack coherent guidance and procedures for departments to follow to protect law enforcement officers rights when they were under investigation. in fact in only half of the states do officers enjoy legal protections against false accusations abuse of conduct. this leaves hundreds of thousands of officers with limited or no due process rights in the work place. officers like any other persons can be expected to treat others the way they are treated themselves. if officers are consistently exposed to a corrosive climate

of suspicion, distrust, second-guessing, and heavy-handed or arbitrary discipline then we can not gain surprise when officers create similar world view of social environment outside of the department. on other hadn't everyone benefits when sense of fairness, mutual respect an benefit of the doubt is recognized not being expected from officers but being owed to them as well. a law enforcement officer bill of rights would require departments to establish effective procedures for receipt, review, investigation of complaints against officers. if disciplinary action is foreseeable, officers would be notified of the investigation. the nature of the complaint and recommendation of investigators. officers would be guaranteed the right to reasonable limits on time duration and location of interrogation. the imposition of discipline would be reviewable by neutral third party and officer would enjoy the same rights to counsel other citizens in our nation expect and enjoy. in addition implementing law enforcement officer bill of rights with intended process for

receiving and handling of complaints would insure individuals that management takes community concerns seriously and conducts fair inquiries. this would bring transparency of process and development of trust between police officers, employing agencies and the communities they reserve. recommendation, establish a national law enforcement officer bill of rights to insure due process. additionally it is critical for management toe a effectively communicate goals and initiatives as well as understand the rank-and-file perspective the mutual communitycation of these goals an perspectives can be most effectively and efficiently achieved through medium recognizing associations. it is difficult to build trust when unions and associations are demonized and belittled if the union leadership were not accurately conveying the views of officers on the treat, they would be swiftly ousted by their own membership. it is therefore both wise and practical for agency management to recognize and work with the representatives of rank-and-file officers who are actually carrying out the policies of the agency. recommendation?

encourage agency leaders and the public to recognize and take advantage of benefits of police unions and associations. as our officers work to build relationships with their communities they must be provided every protection necessary to insure share safety. napol work tirelessly to authorize and fully fund the bulletproof partnership program. . . >> requires receiving agencies to have

on the books a mandatory wear policy. most agencies have in place use of wearing seat belts. obviously, napo supports seat belts. however, even a mandatory policy does not and should not be equated with a zero tolerance enforcement method of enforcement policy, smart enough to conceive of every possible circumstance in which an officer will find herself. some circumstances, cases that we have seen in our office and which quickly come to mind include the situation where a wounded officer cannot survive the wait for an ambulance and other officers plus their wounded comrade in a police car and quickly drive him to the nearest emergency room, providing direct pressure on the gunshot wounds the with whole way. the policy's technically violetted, but it would -- violated but it would clearly

be unjust to enforce it in such circumstances. similarly, keeping a vest on would impair ability to swim. again, technically the policy is violated but justice would require recognition that a hire goal is served then. finally, it should not impact a surviving family member's ability to receive psob death benefits. the purpose of the psob is to provide sustenance for the surviving family members of an officer killed in the line of duty, not to discipline an already deceased officer. the better approach napo believes would be to amend the policy to provide when an officer loses his or her license and was in compliance, the death benefit would be enhanced for the survivors. this would help achieve the goal of utilization of safety equipment while not penalizing survivors for the failures of a

now-dead family member. officers' families should not be penalized by the application of mandatory wear policies. napo is including coverage of an officer's death from the effects of ptsd. officers are forced to biel with a career's worth -- to deal with a career's worth of human misery, the abused child, the adolescent rape victim the mother killed by a drunk driver the baby hit by stray bullets, the grandmother beaten half to death for a few dollars. these aren't stories in the news for the officers involved. they have to respond to the situation and take responsibility for it. this is what passes for normal in their work world. the work that officers do each day in environments in which they are placed take a huge toll on a human mind, body and soul. many of our officers suffer from ptsd. while we continue to work diligently to insure these officers receive the help and treatment, support they deserve if an officer's death is the

result of ptsd that officer's family should receive benefits and if the officer's death was a result of ptsd. i appreciate the opportunity to share these insights and urge you to consider them moving forward. thank you very much. >> and thank you for your testimony. next we'll hear from jonathan thompson executive director, national there haves' association. >> good afternoon -- national sheriffs association. >> thank you for inviting me to testify. my name is jonathan thompson, currently executive director of the national sheriffs' association. national sheriffs' association represents the 3080 sheriffs in the united states. nearly all of whom are elected democratically by the people and each one serves as the chief law enforcement officer for his or her county or parish. sheriffs are the only law enforcement officers in the nation providing the full line of services including jail operations and courtroom security.

the officer-sheriff is the law enforcement -- office of sheriff is the law enforcement agency most accountable directly to the people they serve. on the topic of voices from the field. my written p testimony was submitted to the task force earlier and offers in-depth discussion on a range of issues. however, in light of the weekend's attacks on minneapolis police officer jordan davis and last night's ambush of a georgia sheriff, joey terrell and his deputy, i'd like to focus today on the role of law enforcement in a larger criminal justice system. this task force has been convened to look specifically at the law enforcement in the 21st century. but law enforcement does not operate in a vacuum, nor should it be examined in one. to fully understand law enforcement in the 21st century we believe it's imperative to look at all facets of the criminal justice system 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 seeking to break the law. social media tools and applications are having a dramatic impact upon the safety of our police personnel and the communities they protect. for example, one application simply and easily allows anyone with a smartphone to potentially track and stalk the location and behavior of law enforcement personnel. while on the surface that may sound reasonable, we have heard from countless nsa members and their deputies who are alarmed by the dangers posed by this kind of tracking. we applaud the creativity of the companies and individuals of this country for it is they who 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've heard, from 2013 through 2014 123 law enforcement persons were killed in the line of duty. of those, it's statistically shown that 28 were ambushed -- ambushed -- by their killers. the recent deaths of officer ramos and officer liu in new york city broke our nation's heart. two men who swore to uphold the law were without provocation or justification, they were murdered or assassinated. the possibility this type of application played a role in these murders is frightening to the men and women in uniform. our military leaders would not permit a known adversary to have and use similar applications to track and potentially harm our forces. neither should our elected leaders and most importantly, the corporations that build our

nation, should they be able to benefit from the use of these types of applications. we urge you to look at them. we cannot deny that anyone is seeking to do harm to our law enforcement personnel are doing so to undermine our society. those who break the law must remain our primary focus of policing in the 21st century. for 228 years our society has steadfastly upheld the principle that we are a nation of laws and that the rule of law determines how a society succeeds. that philosophy is what to our members, their deputies, their staffs and their communities are committed to doing. it's too easy to focus the blame of the criminal justice system shortcomings on law enforcement. our deputies, our sheriffs, our officers stand as the face of the criminal justice system every time they put on that uniform. but we have seen in recent tragedies how focusing the blame solely on law enforcement can have deadly, deadly

consequences. we cannot continue to allow errant media reporting and those with little or no direct law enforcement experience to blame law enforcement for the shortcomings of an entire society. we believe those who really want to help solve complicated human behavioral problems need to come out of their offices and classrooms and stop using inflammatory and unsupportive rhetoric to simply get their names in the media. in survey after survey, the public overwhelmingly supports law enforcement. to them, we say thank you. yet every day our sheriffs, their deputies and the law enforcement officers represented from the folks at this table today endeavor to excel at their jobs and avoid, avoid those painful or even deadly mistakes. our law enforcement professionals deserve better. they deserve a principal government that listens and -- a federal government that listens and supports their efforts to protect our communities. they deserve the equipment and training that'll help keep them safe. we cannot, we cannot continue to

ask our deputies and our officers to do more with less. doing so places their lives in danger and threatens the safety of our communities. our communities deserve better too. through elections sheriffs are directly accountable to their communities. sheriffs understand how important it is to insure good community relations and know that we must always work to continue building those relationships. sheriffs know that our communities expect the highest level of professionalism from our deputies, and we strive every day to provide that. the 3080 sheriffs of the united states are invested in the counties and parishes they protect. the national sheriffs' association appreciates the opportunity to provide input to this honorable task force. i urge you the members of in this task force to remember that law enforcement does not keys in a vacuum and that we must look at the entire system the entire criminal justice system if we are to fully address the problems that exist in the 21st century.

and on a closing note, i want to thank all of you for the time you've put into this. it's a difficult task. we appreciate it very much. >> thank you sir, and thank all of you for your testimony. now we're going to turn to task force members for questions, and i'll call upon them in the order in which they've indicated to me that they have a question. and i'd also for you panelists, if a question is not corrected to you but you want -- directed to you, but you want to add something, feel free to do so. chief zakhary, all you have to do is give a little indication, you can jump in there as well. >> thank you, sir, i will. >> all right. so we'll begin with tracy meres followed by cedric alexander. >> thank you, each of you for your testimony. i have one specific question for chief bryant and then another question for i guess the panel. so i'll just ask the question of chief bryant and then -- because they're not related and if you could come back. i was very struck by your testimony, and i was trying to

understand the resource constraint issue. if you could just help me to understand what entity actually funds the tribal police? do the tribes themselves run the police, or is this a federal/tribal partnership? i just didn't quite understand the lack of resources issue there. >> well the tribes are funded both through the bureau of indian affairs and through the tribal governments themselves. >> okay. >> the government has a obligation to fund the tribes' law enforcement programs. >> okay. >> so they -- >> so if there aren't enough resources, the resources are supposed to come from where? it's probably a stupid question on my part, but just so i can understand. >> the funding comes from the bureau of indian affairs a federal agency. >> okay. thank you. the second question i have is, um, for everyone but probably mostly mr. canterbury and

mr. dalton. and i don't know the if you were here for the -- if you were here for the first two panels. we heard a lot about the different kinds of the sources of police injury, and a major source appears to be vehicular crashes. mr. dalton, you mentioned wearing a seat belt a bit. 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 seat belts. i depress the question i have -- i guess the question i have more you in particular, but anybody can chime in there can you tell me what the union organizations are doing in this particular to help support officers wearing seat belts? because it seems to me that that along with encouraging officers to simply drive slower and do a few things could actually not only address a good percentage of fatalities, but could also

avert injuries. >> well, there's several reasons that our officers don't wear or don't like to wear their seat belts. one is with the 35 pounds of equipment that they're wearing when they're trying to exit their vehicle very quickly on a scenario their seat belt catches. i've seen a lot of badges ripped off of uniforms. but we do support use of seat belts. we support the mandatory policy of seat beltsment but like napo -- belts but like napo to, we're concerned that if an officer has to and i know just from personal experience in a high speed pursuit when that chase is nearing the end, it was common for me to loosen my seat belt so i could exit my vehicle very quickly. so punitive situations like that are detrimental to officers wearing them. if they're going to get penalized, they'll just not wear 'em. they don't worry about their own

personal safety, because they want to get out of the car quickly to handle the scenario. but we did participate in a forum earlier this year where we did enter a joint agreement as an organization that we support the use of seat belts and any other safety i equipment. >> i think from our end as well. i know we were happy to participate in the same forum that was hosted up in philadelphia. i know several of the participants both from the president's task force as well as in the audience were there as well and support the goal of increased usage of it. i think this terms of achieving that goal one of the things we support and i mentioned in my testimony, i would call the incentivization of the psob benefit. and instead of officers being afraid that if they're not wearing a seat belt that if they are killed in the line of duty that their survivors may be deprived of that benefit that the administrators within the psob program may look at that as indicia of recklessness or

carelessness on the part of the officer sufficient to deprive the survivors of the benefit. we would rath say that an officer was wearing his or her seat belt or body armor and if, unfortunately, the officer did lose their life, that the benefits to the survivors would be enhanced. from our point of view, i don't think that trying to penalize an officer who's now deceased for not wearing his seat belt by taking away this benefit from the surviving family members is going to achieve the goal of increased usage. >> thank you very much. cedric alexander. >> yes, thank you. the first question is for mr. bryant. you had alluded, in fact you didn't allude, you pretty much stated that some of your tribal officers who patrol triballer territories, you had mentioned sometimes they are mistaken as police officers?

or accused of impersonating police officers, if you will? could you speak more to that as to what you mean very specifically and also what recommendations do you offer for that? and secondly, my next question is for mr. canterbury. you made mention to the fact -- and i think the last time you was with us you also made mention to the fact as well too that community policing is very important which i'm quite sure you agree with. but the high call volumes and less police officers today being hired, are you suggesting or recommending that there need to be more funding to hire more officers across the country? but if you would start mr. bryant, i would appreciate it. >> thank you. what i'm referring to in many instances across the country tribal law enforcement receives their training through the indian police academy and that is not recognized in some of the

states through the state certifications. and when tribal officers come off the reservation in uniform if they're not state certified in that particular state then they are sometimes threatened with arrest for impersonating law enforcement officers because they are not state certified. they're certified through the indian police academy which is through the federal government. so that's in some instances that has occurred, and it's still occurring to this day. it's because of the strain between the political issues between the state and the tribes, and sometimes the state and the federal government. >> would you offer the recommendation of maybe something that could change that? >> well, they tried to address it where they've tried to have a lot of the tribal agencies receive the special law enforcement commissions. and what that does is just certify them as a federal

officer. but to me, it gets back to the states recognizing tribal law enforcement which has been an issue, and it still is an issue. and it's again, it gets back to the same thing as us traying to establish mutual aid -- trying to establish mutual aid so that officers are covering and helping other officers whether you're tribal, whether you're state, county or local. and it's a work this in progress -- work in progress and a lot of it's politics. but it's about, you know, at the end of the day it's police officers should be recognized as police officers. >> thank you sir. >> we have that same issue with federal officers in some states not being recognized as peace officers, and that -- as you know, there are 50 standards in the country for what is a police officer and what is not. on the issue, fop since the 1994 omnibus crime bill have been huge supporters of the cops program and the hiring of

100,000 additional police officers. we all know that at the height we were closing in on a million police officers on the street in this country, and at last stunts somewhere between 760,000 and 800,000. and with call volume that we have now, police officers -- even in jurisdictions that support the concept of community-orient policing or problem-oriented policing when your call volume is that high you're just totally reactive. and we believe that's a problem. st also a safety issue. -- it's also a safety issue. it's one of the things that causes our officers to get in their cars and go faster than they would normally go because when you're going from call to call to call and then have to brake for emergency calls, it puts a lot of pressure on police officers. and answering their calls is the most important aspect of their job, as you know. >> your recommendation for that? >> fully funding the cops

program to the '94 levels so that we have state and local cooperation. i mean, i love our brothers in the federal law enforcement sector but without 900,000 plus state and local officers, they could not do their jobs. 97% of law enforcement's done by state and locals. >> thank you very much. >> sean smoot. [inaudible conversations] >> mr. chairman? >> oh, i'm sorry. >> the perspective from the sheriffs. >> i'm sorry. >> we echo many of my colleagues' comments. the one cautionary point i would make is that -- and i agree the full funding for cops. we also believe that it's a program and an office and operation that needs to have a better profile. we do just push put a cautionary note out there that as we drive for a higher goal of officers and deputies on the force and in the field there's a lagging cost to that. and we all have to be very

sensitive to that. at the end of the day, what is that cost, who has to pay it? and, obviously, from the sheriffs' perspectives as they're locally elected, those costs often come down to the county. so we put a cautionary tale out there. while we support it, we recognize most importantly there is that trailing cost factor. >> thank you all very much. sean smoot. >> i'd like to, first of all thank the panel for their very good testimony this afternoon. thank all of you who were able to travel to be with us. and, chief, thank you for making the effort to skype in with us online. you know, it seems to me sitting here and listening to the testimony of the last several days we've heard but especially this morning, you know, in the united states unions have been at the forefront of creating safe workplaces, developing safety initiatives implementing

wellness plans for their members and specifically in policing unions have played a huge role in engaging the community in terms of pals and other outreach programs that are supported by police associations and unions. so i wonder -- and this question is for the panel, but it seems obvious to me that, you know, in the states that don't have collective bargaining for police officers, that might be something that we would recommend. and so i'm curious to know if you think that would be a good idea or not. >> speaking on behalf of the fraternal order of police, sean as you well know the officers that work in non-union states make 30% less in salary and benefits than those that work in states that are unionized. the other problem is that the assault rates and killed in the line of duty are higher in states that don't have collective bargaining.

and specifically, it's because of what you talked about. every major improvement to safety in law enforcement since 1915 has been made by the police officers deputies corrections officers forcing management to include programs like the bulletproof vest initiative worker's compensation, safety laws like our brothers in the firefighters have had since their inclusion in osha in 1958. police officers are still not covered under osha regulations in the u.s. so i think it's vital that collective bargaining or whatever term you want to use, the interaction with the police association of the union is vital for officer safety. >> i agree obviously. i mean our group is made up of associations from around the country. but i think it's important for perhaps, states or local jurisdictions that would be resistant to it to remember that if a state enacts a collective

bargaining law all it does is provide the option for workers to be represented by a yoon onif they -- union if they choose to. no state legislature can compel anybody to join a union or to force a sheriff to recognize the union if the workers don't want one. the other thing i think that's important to emphasize, because it ties into the same, i think, level of resistance sometimes that the related issue of a national law enforcement officer bill of rights, one of the frequent criticisms of that is, well if we have that in place or the union in place, i can't get rid of the bad crop, dirty cop, brutal cop. and that's just not true. speaking from my own experience but from cases where i've worked with police officers who did the right thing and were wrongly accused and police officers who did the wrong thing and were properly accused, when you have the framework that's in place, it actually provides in practical terms procedural checklists for the department.

and it's very difficult for an attorney representing the union or representing the officer who's been fired to try to get that officer's job back if the chief or the sheriff can go to the arbitrator the judge whoever it is and say look here's what the law provides. here's a checklist of eight rights the officer has. i did every one of them. i told him what he was accused of, told him the range of discipline let him call witness, let him record it. we followed the law. he violated the policy. it's very difficult at that point to criticize or to say that you can't get rid of someone who shouldn't be a police officer. and i think just one final observation, i think most of the jurisdictions including sheriff's departments and agencies that have gone from not having a union representing their workers to ones that have, after initial period of perhaps distrust or fear i think by and large they find it's actually

easier to manage the workplace if you have a good relationship in place. just like any other industry where the workers feel like they have a voice in what's going on. >> may i just add one comment real quickly? i think as you look at recommendations writ large mandates coming down from washington for 3080 different jurisdictions has a risk. so we are very cautious about that. each elected sheriff has an obligation to uphold to their electorate. many of the counties do, are represented. many are not. the point being they're all different. one size will not fit all. thank you. >> and thank you. tracy meares. >> this is a question that just occurred to me when i was listening to the interaction

between cedric alexander and the panel about the cops office funding. i wonder if any of you would be willing to speak to the relevance of the size of the agency to producing greater officer safety and wellness? i mean, a lot of the issues have to do with capacity for training for organization, you know? a lot of the ability to mandate or have access to mental health counseling and the like. and in some of our written testimony, there's been a suggestion that there should be a minimum size of agency in order to help facilitate, you know, provision of these services that would not only be good for the officers, but probably b -- i think probably obviously -- good for deployment of services to the community. and i wonder if you would be

willing to, any one of you all of you, speak to that. and especially with you chief bryant, i actually don't know how the minimum size of agency would work in indian country as related to, you know, state and -- i just i'm already having a hard enough time trying to understand, you know, the logistical and governmental issues of provision of services. but anyway, i think you get the question. >> well, in the tribal under the cops office the tribes have their own set-aside grant process, and it is broken down by size of agency. and i agree i think that when you have the size of an agency agency -- especially most of the agencies across indian country are small very small agencies with very large land bases that they have to patrol. but given that, it is important that we do not have to get into a sort of a system where we have

to compete against larger agencies, we have this system that does break it down so that smaller agencies are working through the grant process with smaller agencies and vice versa with the larger ones. but again, we have the tribal grant process is separate from -- on that end through the cops office which we are grateful for. >> anyone else? like let's say a minimum size of 80-100 in an agency. and if it's not that large, then maybe there should be consolidation. >> i would, i would point out, i guess i'd say there's two maybe competing interests involved in the suggestion. one is that economies of scale certainly, i think, would help the provision of rarely-used resources such as counseling after an officer's been involved in a shooting. and you'd want to have those resources available for the officers who are so involved. and it may be very difficult for

smaller departments to have that readily available. at the same time, however though, i think that by increasing the size of an agency and by consolidation i think the risk is that we may lose the sense of community involvement both from the community and from the police department itself. when the agency gets larger i think it loses some of the ability to pursue some of the goals that make the community-oriented model successful. and that a larger or a consolidated agency the risk there i think is from the community as well as the officers involved it's no longer, you know, my town's police department. this is a regional department that risks losing some of the involvement and connection with the community. >> from the sheriffs' perspective, we would agree with

that. i would adjust a couple of points that, as i said earlier no one size fits all. each of the counties that they're dealing with has different requirements, and in some cases sheriffs have primary law enforcement responsibility. in fact, in most cases they do. but i think going back in history if you look at community policing, that's what sheriffs have traditionally done. and i think as you all know, it is being solved at the local and smallest common denominator issue. that's where we agree locally with my colleague. we just would be very concerned if you, if there was a sudden line in the sand that said there should be at least 25 officers for every 500 people. somehow that would seem random and somehow it would seem unavoidably hard to mandate and to insure that you get uniformity across the system that you're trying to achieve,

excuse me. >> i think government's first respondent is to protect the -- responsibility is to protect the people of the community period. the first and most sacred responsibility of any government besides not -- withstanding their size. but minimum staffing levels are something that need to be looked at very, very harshly looked at. most major cities have 2.4-2.8 police officers per 1,000. my jurisdiction, which is very urban, has less than .5 law enforcement officers per thousand in the county jurisdiction. and it does cause problems. it reduces the amount of contact with the community, it puts the officers in much more of a dangerous situation and i also think uniformity in the ptsd response in the country -- south carolina's a state where, like colorado where ptsd is not

recognized as a workman's comp injury. and officers can be forced to eap programs, but they're not designed to deal with ptsd. so uniformity in those areas would be a wonderful recommendation from this task force. >> and i would just like to comment based on one of my recommendations that every law enforcement officer be equipped with a vest. and in some of those very small departments that you were talking about whether they're considering consolidating, maybe look at a different level of support for those smaller departments that aren't able to come up with the matching funds for the vests or don't have capacity or the folks that can apply for the grants to get those vests. having that support at a higher level for those smaller departments would be very helpful. >> okay. do any of our task force members have additional questions? if not then thank all of you for your testimony and, please

join me in thanking them officially. [applause] okay. we're going to take a break until 2:15. thank you. >> okay, welcome back. at this time we will go into community feedback. i'll turn to jim, do we have anymore -- we have no online comments, and for now i have two speakers from the audience. let me start with -- and ahead of time please forgive me if i mispronounce your name. i want to say analupe comfort, and then we're followed by michael bell. please say your name so i can know how badly i april pronounced -- i april pronounced it. -- >> [inaudible] >> thank you. >> i'm here today, of course with every civilized society we

do need good cops. we need good policing. but my question to you is that of accountability. in case of cops' misconduct -- because i do raise my children that police are our friends, and if we are ever in any need they see a police officer around, they should go to him or her. and they will get the help they need. but that's not what happened on february 19th many silver springs where my son was brutally murdered in the hands of a police officer christopher jordan. and he said he told him to stop, like, 30 times in 30 seconds. up until now the contents of his backpack and his id and everything is still unaccounted for. what do we do i mean, evidently

there's a problem. ien mean they had -- i mean they have to kill the people they are supposed to protect. how do we go about this, that this doesn't -- because it was the worst thing ever for a mother to bury their child. and my family and i believe my son was -- if my son was white or is not african-american, he would be alive today. how do we resolve this? because it's the worst thing ever. and in my own case i felt like justice was not served. it is the worst injustice ever, and he doesn't deserve to die like that, and no compensation. and the video the cop showed that he obeyed the police officer and everything and the prosecutor, they're working together like husband and wife. telling me that somebody

mistakenly deleted my evidence. how do you, how do you surmise this? >> so thank you, ms. comfort -- >> thank you. >> what i can say, this is not a question and answer period. i apologize, we won't provide you a response, i would say we have some members of the cops team that we can refer you to potential sources to help you answer some of the questions you have, but we're just not in a position as the task force to answer your questions so aapologize for that, ma'am. next is michael bell. >> good afternoon. michael bell here. i made a trip down from wisconsin. my flight was canceled 8:00 saturday morning, and at 11:00 i said, okay i'm going to drive, that's how important it is for me to be here. in 2004 i had a 21-year-old blond-haired blue-eyed boy killed under a spotlight, his hands cuffed behind his back, and i tried to work with law

enforcement and also the government entities at the time. i'm a retired air force lieutenant colonel. i flew the kc-135r model which is an air refueler. i served in afghanistan kosovo, desert storm. immediately after 9/11 i was refueling fighters over the president's ranch could be in hay worth texas. my first response when my son was killed was i feel this investigation is going to go the same way as national transportation safety board and united states inspector general investigations, but in a very short period of time i found out that was not the case. so over the years we ended up winning a settlement in regards to my son's death, and i spent my entire portion of that and probably another $750,000 of my own money to bring the concept of independent review and

external investigation to the process because i knew that the way i kept myself alive and pilots under my command and those that i trained alive by teaching them lessons from pastment and i had -- from the past. and i had recognized there were six core elements involved in an aircraft investigation and review, and that led to its success. and if you take a look at the chart that i provided you in the handout, you can take a look at 60 years. we're at the lowest level ever. there is a profession that is successful, and this is a profession that is a national crisis. and so i've fought in the state of wisconsin for about nine years, and on april 23rd of this -- of 2014 governor scott walker signed a portion of our law into state statute, the first in the nation. i did not get that done by myself. i worked with law enforcement. law enforcement must be part of the solution.

but essentially what i had recognized that those six core elements in aviation investigation and review weren't happening in law enforcement, and therefore, we tried to change portions of that. and i, i asked for data and there was no data. i said let's see the dash cam. it was withheld from me. i asked for further investigations that were being sent out throughout the community so law enforcement could learn from it, and it wasn't happening. so we fought very hard. i sat down at the, at the wisconsin professional police association headquarters with its director jim palmer and i sat down and we crafted this legislation together. and i gave it to representative gary byes, a retired chief deputy sheriff from door county. and he worked hand in hand with a human rights advocate. and together over the course of several months we worked hand in hand, and we got it through the

whole process. one of the other things that i think is very important here is that there's -- we talked about officer safety today. the officer involved in my son's death committed suicide in 2010. and i do think that if there was a proper investigation and those types of accidents do occur sometimes we kill our own people in friendly fire. we know that by being a military man. i think that officer might be alive today. one of the things that i did to help process my own emotions of losing a son is i worked with a group out of california, her name is laura melon, she's a professor of family medicine at university of california san francisco. she spent 20 years developing a method called emotions-based training. and earlier today we had the chief from tampa bay say that she worked with emvr for ptsd, but i also strongly, strongly

recommend taking a look at emotions-based training. because if you want your officers to -- if they're sad, you don't want that sad emotion to go to depression. if they're angry you don't want it to go into rage. and i, and i know that laurel's group right now has been working with officers out in that area. so i strongly take a look at it. it's not counseling it's emotions-based training and it's a very important thing, and i have some information regarding that. if there's any -- if anybody needs to contact me, please take a look in the back of the handout. i did not give my e-mail address, but if you call me, i can go ahead and core respond with you that way -- correspond with you. thank you. >> thank you mr. bell. thank you for the travel. it's not a short trip. do me a favor please give your card -- there's a young lady nodding her head, we'd like to make sure the task force has all the materials you have. thank you very much. with that, i'll double check if there's no other comments,

anything else from the rest of the audience? no, sir. so the co-chairs, you have -- [inaudible] >> this has been yet another very full day of testimony for the task force. i think our panels and witnesses have once again been remarkable in bringing very, very intelligent testimony to us. the day has been full. i would just say it's been extraordinarily helpful. with that chuck i'll turn to you. >> well, let me just close by one, thanking everyone who appeared today to provide oral testimony, those that submitted written testimony or simply watched via the internet or television, whatever it may have been. your input has been very, very important to all of us as we move forward to present the final recommendations to the

president. i want to thank the cops staff for the great work that they've done even with this short time frame. they have really been keeping up with what's going on, providing feedback for us along the way to kind of make it a little bit easier in trying to put together a report in such a short period of time. sai, who has been working alongside cops providing a lot of the staff support want to thank them for everything that they have done. and i don't know if you've noticed, but we've had sign interpreters there throughout the day, and they've been with us at all the different hearings for the deaf and hard of hearing, and we really appreciate them being here and being able to communicate with that very important community as well. so now we'll turn it over to the task force members for their

closing remarks, and roberto why don't we start with you? >> thank you, chuck. i, too want to thank the staff for all the work that they do to help us to do this important work that takes a lot of time and a lot of coordination, and your work has just been amazing so thank you all. the most fascinating part about this whole process of the task force has been the fact that there is such similarity of thoughts throughout the country but that there's always unique and creative, different ways to do the same goals that we have. and to be able to gather as much of those as we can in one document in one strategy to put out as the best practices for the nation, i think is going to be very helpful to the profession at large and for individual agencies that are

looking to how to address certain problems within their own jurisdictions. so i'm very happy and excited to continue with our work. i final hi see a light at the -- finally see a light at the end of the tunnel, and i'm just hoping it's not a train -- [laughter] but it's been a rewarding experience, and i thank you for taking the time, those of you who came to listen. >> cochairs ramsey and robinson director davis, thank you again to you and to the cops staff and sai for another fantastic day of testimony. the quality of the witnesses today and the subject matter, as you know is something that's very near and dear to my heart and i think we got a lot to talk away from today and that a lot of really good recommendations. the witnesses today provided not only great testimony and rationale for their recommendations, but solid

recommendations in most cases and gave it to us in a way that we'll be able to turn around into our final report, i think, fatherly easily. fairly easily. i really appreciate the fact that the task force dedicated a day to officer wellness and safety and the fact that officer due process rights and internal procedural justice was a thread that carried throughout the witnesses' testimony today. and so i thank you for that opportunity on with behalf of -- on behalf of the law enforcement. thanks. >> i'll jump on the band wagon and thank the cops staff and sai for your support. i think that's really important. and i also want to echo what sean said about how much i appreciate the discussion about internal procedural justice. i think that's the absolute key for us to expect our troops to

employ procedural justice on the street. i want to thank the two parents that came today and express my deep condolences for your loss. i can't imagine how hard this is for you, and i really admire you for having the strength to come and share your story, and i encourage you to keep sharing it so that we can keep getting better because nobody wants this to happen. he looks like my son. thank you for coming. i really appreciate it. >> like my fellow panelists, i thank all the witnesses for coming and the contributions of those of you in the public who came here near and far to contribute to our deliberations. i said earlier today -- and i just want to say it again -- that hurt people can hurt people, and so officer safety and wellness is not just important for the officer's sake, it's important for the health and safety and wellness

of their families and for the communities in which they work. they are, in fact, part of the community, so it really is about community safety and wellness. and so it's important that we spend the time thinking about this issue as it's important as all of the other issues that we have discussed so far in our listening session. as we're coming to the end of this, i also want to take an opportunity to thank my fellow task members in addition to the great leadership of our co-chairs. we have been able to do a lot of great work together. we don't necessarily all degree but we know how to speak together and work together in a way that i think will produce a document that we will be proud of and hopefully will be useful for the nation. >> i echo many of the thanks to the incredible cops staff, to the team at sai to fellow task

force members and in particular to our co-chairs who have kept the train moving and kept us focused and on task. certainly, to those who provided testimony today on really critical issue i coagree that hurt people -- i do agree that hurt people can hurt people and so it is of collective importance that we have this conversation. and i appreciate the clarity with which people made very clear and succinct suggestions today. and all of those folks who followed along with us online and in person, we thank you. i would also agree, though, that i think the most important people to thank today are miss comfort and mr. belle. thank you for making -- mr. bell. thank you for making the journey that you have been on every single day since you unfortunately, lost your children. and i think that your example your continued examples remind us of the urgency of this conversation should not have to cost lives, but most certainly that this is a conversation that needs to continue so that it

doesn't cost more lives. and so i thank you for reminding me personally of what i'm here and why we need to do this work. >> want to thank everyone who came out today and folks who tuned in everyone who sat on a panel and my colleagues on the table here and all of technical support staff that has been working hard behind the scenes. i can't -- i also want to thank ms. comfort and mr. bell. ms. comfort, when you say that you believe that your son would still be alive today if he were white i feel like that came at a moment when we're about to go in as a task force to deliberate the recommendations that we put on the president's desk next

week. and i hope that it serves as a reminder to everyone in this room and to folks on this panel that we need to have the conversations that we have been having, i but we need to have them under -- but we neat need to have them under the scope and context of race relations in this country. and so i want to thank you for coming out. i want to thank you for sharing that story. same mr. bell. imagine that was a long ride out. so thank you as well for coming out. and we got, we have a lot of work to do on this task force, and we're running out of time, so i'm i'm committed to being here and working with you all. and hopefully next week when we bring that report to the white house, that could be the first step in, on this journey on creating a process to fix all that is wrong in this country.

>> and i would just like to say in closing without being redundant, and i think we pretty much heard it all from those that sit on this panel with me, thank you all, thank you all for being here, thank you all for the evolution of this, of this task force, the leadership, cops office and new friends and colleagues i've had an opportunity to meet over the last couple of months. more importantly than anything else -- and i will say this very quickly -- is that history is taking place in front of us. and this it's the history of all the bells and the ms. comforts in the world who have lost their children without a sense of understanding. and where we go from here and hopefully, what we have learned here, the hours of testimony and the sharing that people have done that have come in here from across the country is going to be of value.

and i truly do believe that. and this, to me is not going to go into nowhere land. this is going to be meaningful going forward. i truly believe that, ms. comfort. and to the res of in this country as -- to the rest of this country as well this truly has to be about change and what it is that we can do better going forward, because this is an age-old issue from the beginning of policing. and we're in a position and we're on a trajectory i truly believe that's going to change the course of history and policing in this country, and it is long overdo you want -- overdue. thank you all for being here, and i'd like to say thanks to all my colleagues and leadership in the cops office and the support staff, contractors everyone involved in this process. it has been more than a notion, more than a pleasure, and this

is something i will carry with me for the rest of not just my career, but my life. so thank you all very much for helping me to grow and develop and be a better, better human being too. thank you. >> so let me thank my staff, the cops office and our support staff and the team, great team from sai. this is now the end of the sixth pillar. tomorrow, thanks to the great leadership of our co-chairs we will close out the listening sessions, what i would say the hearing sessions with the panel of future community policing. if you think about it from a timing point of view there's no better way to wrap this part of the process up than to look in the future. i do want to thank all the panelists for coming. many tried to get here, they could not, so i appreciate them still sticking with us using skype for our audience participation. and today was, to me, was a reminder of a comment that i heard both the president and the

attorney general say and that is as we look at the relations for the -- relations for the field -- recommendations for the field, we know we need to make sure young men of all colors have the fair and equal treatment when they step out of their house that they're not going to be stopped or harassed because of the color of their stick. but the president -- of their skin. but the president also made it clear, as did the attorney general, that we also need to with equal, rigorous support and loud voice to make sure that officers who work have the right to go home. and a threat to them going home is not as simple as gunfire. we learned today there's a lot of other variables. so i think the task force is on a balanced trajectory to take a look at all the stakeholder groups. i'm impressed with the -- thanks to the leadership of the co-chairs -- of the diversity of the witnesses, the perspectives, the positions on the table. we've been able to agree, we've been able to disagree. as professor meares says, to do so without being disagreeable. and i hope those watching really

will embrace that notion. there's been varying perspectives here, but that reflects our country. this is going to be, without a doubt, a historical moment as has been suggested, it is one we should be proud of even before we finish the report because this process alone suggests the progress today. and as i listened to the last panel, i think we can look forward to see where we're heading as a country. we have elected officials and police management and police laborers, community leaders, people that have suffered great loss all willing to come together to talk about solutions on how to advance forward. and i think that's what it's really all about. so if i may on behalf of the administration and the president, the attorney general, thank the two co-chairs, the task force, those watching and everyone participating our staff, sai, our technical advisers, um and i want to thank them now because we're about to work them more than you can ever imagine over the next couple of days to get this report done and give a good product for the president, for the nation. please accept that thanks and

know that we're eternally grateful for your leadership. so madam co-chair? >> >> with that we'll be wrapping up this session and seeing many of you tomorrow for our last listening session. thank you all. >> the senate about to begin morning business. no official legislation is on the calendar, but yesterday the senate failed for a fourth time to move forward on a spending bill to fund the department of homeland security that included provisions to block president obama's executive actions on immigration. current funding for dhs expires friday. after the vote failed to move forward, senate majority leader mitch mcconnell split the provisions from the spending bill. in an op-ed in the hill, the president called the looming shutdown of dhs irresponsible and vowed to fight any attempt to turn back his immigration policies. he writes: it was my hope that a new republican-led congress

would seek to govern responsibly. instead we've even heard irresponsible threats to shut down the department of homeland security for no reason other than partisan disagreement over my actions. you can read more at thehill.com. as we take you live now to the floor of the u.s. senate. the president pro tempore: the senate will come to order. the reverend randy cash, the american legion national chaplain from lincolnton, north carolina, will lead the senate in prayer. the guest chaplain:let us pray. almighty and everlasting god, in whose name we trust and pray, it is fitting to pause, if but momentarily, to recognize you, the one in whom does finally