take notice and even though it is not geared towards any political party, both parties plow through it and think about these issues. the effect has been enormous, the current created to get on board has benefited them with so much more space, it can only get better even if it doesn't directly impact clinton or trump or whatever. it has to be acknowledged. in the space i work in the ability to talk about black workers was opened up by the larger movement's conversation. i got to acknowledge it has been widened exponentially. >> two things. i hear that a lot. the emperor has no close moment that happens.

there was this moment after mike brown, eric garner, everyone in the country, like this revelation people seem to be having but it was an important moment it opened up these opportunities but i do criminal justice policy. i think what we have seen in the last two years despite the mobilization and organizing or focusing, done incredible things, an increase in police budget or surveillance, and blue lives matter bill, there has been an opening of conversation for the critical response is not a misdiagnosis but it is counterproductive. it consulted corporate power

because -- before we released it, was incredibly -- neither of them proposed any actual solutions or problems we are talking about so the realization that all parties are way behind in terms of knowing what is happening. according to what is suggesting, more body cameras, those who have been in the industry of black and brown people for decades, to give them a contract to continue that work rate is not progress. that is not reform. we are not moving forward. it is important to say that. this agenda is separate, nobody is pushing this agenda. we had to do it ourselves in

some ways. it is important to realize despite the conversation, retroactive to the first proactive and negative and consolidation of profit and power. i will say that. the other thing i would say the idea of independent political power is key and essential and has been happening, doing amazing out of jackson, incredible examples of folks coming together and voting political power or exercising that in ways we have to see before destroying the systems we are inside of now. >> we can't be on the topic of elections in political power

without uplifting the fact that our political power, whatever semblance we have is under attack in 2016 election, or election year, there has been a slew of voter suppression laws, last i checked there were 15 states, that could change but really imposing onerous restrictions like voter ids and all these things that are antithetical to exercising the right to vote and political power and in a country that relies heavily on overcriminalization of black and brown people, that increased criminalization coincides with disenfranchisement. the more you lock people up especially on felonies and in turn take away their right to vote, prison gerrymandering, all

these things that are not coincidental or accidentally related, in a country that overincarcerates, i don't believe in that term. in a country that relies in incarceration most people in prisons are black, that in turn means most people cannot vote by legislation that disenfranchises people with felony records, that is not coincidence. on the road to political power, we fight back against laws that are passed to suppress our vote and exercise that right and prison gerrymandering and the right to vote and exercise political power for people who are lacking cages and when they come out and try to return and intersociety, can't impose expectations for people to be

citizens in society, taking away their right to vote and ability to find work in housing and all these other structural barriers to that so that is an important point to raise. >> amen to that. the other thing we see building local power and the ability to change things locally you see states brokered by conservative folks often pushing against political power and passed laws, with control devices or police departments, the attack is happening at the federal level or state level and to vote or community who has come together and push for progressive reform, to do that based on state preemption laws, things we should be addressing. >> every action is opposite and equal reaction was interesting

what you shared and content, i see this, i don't know, increased conversation, we can talk about things and also i would combine them to say this is a political sleight-of-hand, the conversations arise when you talk about race and everything and people cloaked in the duopoly of government officials who are beholden to democratic or republican parties and corporations that control them, they are talking about it more but like you laid out what is happening behind the scenes is being implement a counter to that. i have to go back to the question, we have to create an alternative political power structure but how is that working in terms of electoral

politics? i don't know if we are agreeing but we don't have faith in the republican democratic party, not only are they not helpful, they are actually adversarial. most of our people, most black people, those who are registered to vote, large numbers of people in the us to participate in the process but those who are are logically democrat and the whole thing about the fascism and whatnot, a proven fascist is being largely supported, from what i'm hearing from the panel, proven to lock us up, go war, decimate countries but we are scared about the person with no record yet and i'm not saying we shouldn't be but i am just saying this seems to be an odd

thing, the moderator hat, what you said, what should be our engagement in the process of electoral causes and registering people to vote a lot of people want to know who to vote for and tell you who they will vote for and say hillary clinton. is there a strategy to deal with the electoral aspect of this? >> everything i said holds true in answer to that question but you can -- >> should not part of that strategy be to abolish the democratic and republican party? >> i don't think what i said is in opposition to that. to build independent political power is to not rely on those systems. maybe that isn't the same thing.

i am not interested in perpetuating the republican and democratic parties. trying to do that, i think while we still exist in a bicameral two party system, you can stay principled or true to your values in the voting booth. you can vote for the green party candidate. we always talk about republicans and democrats, the green party is still there. you can vote for jill stein, the for hillary clinton or donald trump, not an endorsement. right. so you can still not vote -- you can vote for the green party, you can write in a vote but also

this heavy presidential election conversation, there are other seats up for grabs, congress is important and beyond november the local elections are not -- local everything is the mantra. vote for who you want or don't vote for who you want. but still, in this moment we are in, reflecting on president obama's presidency and the difficulty he had, you have to go through congress like the electoral system, the way it is set up is not conducive to democracy the way i think about it. paying attention to those races and not zeroing in on the

presidential candidate is important. >> who the da is, people in their town and who your sheriff is or school board and those are not party candidates, democrats lock up as many folks as republicans. the idea of talking about here are our objectives, organizing folks around those and transform that, the emphasis -- discussing the positions in our everyday lives. talking about -- if we wanted da envisioning safety, and an incredible example demanding the

das incredible asset of political powers, and where we stand, and wanting to do that a different system, the impact for our lives and the agenda we want locally and push candidates over the special. and what we need locally. >> to add more context, states attorney anita alvarez in illinois, anti-blackness in her time in office, she believes in persecuting activism and killing

cops with impunity, and antithetical to my idea of justice, and young black organizers, intergenerational struggle out of office, and rallying behind her opponent or opponents, and candidates campaign, it was a by anita campaign. there was a political education campaign, thousands of multi-young black people in the city of chicago know what a state attorney is and understand the power, how that particular candidate is problematic. when they go to the voting booth, we don't say vote for this person or that, you should not vote for this person because they demonstrated they are not for your life and what to do with that. and understand what power this

person has, returning to independent political power, from that the next step is who do we want to put maybe not in that, how to take hold of how we want to do it with written segments of society. campaigns like that demonstrate what an alternative to political organizing is pro-candidate. >> one last question and then open it up. you already answered earlier on. it is more instructive for people in the room or affiliated organizations, what roles do you see ally movements and organizations playing in realizing the most radical aspects of demands, one thing i can think of is adding when

talking about policy, changing the discourse, adding to our lexicon control. what other ways might you see to answer that question? >> what you just raised in terms of language is important, words mean things in everyday interactions with each other, the way we communicate ideas and building a certain narrative, formerly incarcerated, changing our language, saying white supremacy versus racism, being critical of length used but related to that, and allied organizations. i think really pushing forward a radical agenda starts within your organization. it starts at home, creating or

transforming an anti-oppressive culture, transforming a work culture that is anti-white supremacy. inadvertently or not, how are you treating the most marginalized people in your organization? what are your hiring practices? how do you treat each other? you know what micro-aggression is? how are you perpetuating that in your everyday life with your employees who are black or brown or other people of color or differently abled, being cognizant how you as an individual show up and how your organization's politics played out in your daily interactions with each other and projects you undertake. something i mentioned earlier is the multiplicity of tactics, in

order for the movement to sustain in a comprehensive platform, we have to have a scattered array of campaigns not in alignment, tackling different things, are you in position to take on a piece of this and organize your people? following the lead of people who are most affected and respecting indigenous knowledge, expertise of experience. one of the core values is we are experts of our own experience and don't purport to speak for people or be representative of young black people but to be reflective of what we lived. allied organizations should be able to respect that and leverage your resources, your

power and service to pushing this agenda forward, whether that means for projects you undertake, or initiative you start, in support, the vision the movement has put out, in checking that in interacting your daily work culture as well? >> i will be quick on this because i look forward to hearing from the audience but my colleague often says the work we have been doing particularly with black women's voices in the labor movement is particularly for allies if you don't have black women centered in your economic, social struggle, you are not being real about it because in terms of the litmus test, they are at the nexus of so many political social economic issues. if they are not at the center of

how you envision these tactics you are not being serious. for so many policy organizations in washington dc who would like to talk about any quality but don't break it down racially or talk about justice but don't break it down racially or colorblind in their approach to things there is lack of seriousness in the work they have done in the past and the movement of black lives in many ways threatens that paradigm. the real goal is to figure out a way to move beyond the theme of that and really embrace some of the policies. to your question that is how i envision everyone in this room or everyone watching this on a podcast, have you seen the information, at least the ones you get out of this. >> you have to be comfortable

with being uncomfortable. that is what it boils down to. if you squirmed in your seat when i said white supremacy that is a product. we really have to be real with what the problems are and be explicit and apologetic in how we term those things and to the question of what skin do you have in the game, what side are you on, dealing with what you have to do to get comfortable, operating your discomfort for that end,amen. following on that, expertise in this solution, you know the solution better than folks that went to business or law school who don't actually know what it means, on that expertise, part of that means honoring language folks to describe the issue and

solution and problem in the white supremacy point who get to the side and realigning powell, what the right words are, thinking about it, the solutions, this -- even if you don't like it or doesn't make you comfortable it is about realignment if you are serious about showing up as an ally and the privilege you have because that is what this is, folks don't have that any quality requires that. the idea of -- i don't know. i feel like a little order but in my entire life this possibility, feels like almost

anything is possible but the mobilization of folks, the emperor has no clothes, coverage in media at this moment from southern california, and everyone called the riots in baltimore. just the way we talk about the moments is so different so to rely on the wisdom of elders these moments of come before but now is the time to stand up and ask allies, folks inside the movement have done that. folks with more to lose with positions of privilege and asking them to be in a struggle and be important but i am leveraging power, with this organization, equity, what are you doing inside the organization and budget and time

and staff and if you support operations what does that mean you have, you support community control? if you say you are about something, how are you about that? >> practice makes perfect. >> let's open it up right here. let me get a sense how many people, we are not restricting this to just questions. if you have a brief comment, we want to get as many people as possible. a show of hands, how many people initially got the continued position first. i will call out a view people, and in the back there.

>> thank you, this is pretty intimate space, you were the first who used the specific language of anti-blackness but you recently used the language of black women in the way we are centering serious change. one of the things i love about the work you do, you took this analysis a step further, we are centering lack women, queer persons and radical feminist ideology especially in the aftermath of the execution of karin gaines and we are in a white lead movement, can you talk about the importance of the

social change? >> the movement for black lives broadly is committed to what we call black clear feminist lens and at the root of it basically is the theory of intersection our body, we are comprised with multiple identities, i am a black, queer woman who is the product of an immigrant father. that subjects me to multiple types of oppression. it is not additive. it is really recognizing people's whole self and what that means for how they can and cannot operate freely in the world so we have to be radically inclusive in our analysis, when we think of policy ideas,

programs, how we treat each other, how it showed up in everyday practice. and inadvertently missed gender someone, and being intentional, how people are differently affected, how different people are differently oppressed, and our vision for freedom, for what we want to live in, by censoring those at the margins by doing that, everyone else in turn wins. if the black trans woman who lives in the most impoverished neighborhood is free i am free too. all the liberation is tied together because we recognize

multiple items. >> thank you for everything. doing that -- when it comes to interorganizational he, i can't even imagine. >> i don't want to take the question down a different path if you have a specific thing you are thinking about. >> organization holding each other accountable, and whatever different -- what can that happen in? >> you can jump in. when it comes to accountability,

real accountability when talking about organizations purported to work together in this movement, for this to happen you have the relationship, cannot hold someone accountable in a relationship with them, back to shared values, and the starting point of trust in a relationship in order at some point to hold someone accountable. that is the first step, building that relationship, how you want to work together and be held accountable, that accountability, looks like whatever is defined early on.

decision-making and structures, we have to have an understanding what it means to work together and what we are trying to achieve so it is clear when you violated that or transgressed against that and you already know it is coming. hard to have a blanket mechanism, it has to be cocreated. >> thank you for being here. i am going to piggyback off of this question. i am in basic agreement with most of what you are saying, not so much a destructive criticism, certainly the conversations, public dialogue over

conversations about race, by what measure do i bring the concern? in an african-american community, they still use the term minority, waiting for 2030 or 2040, facing realities where they are not by any means referred to as minorities and yet we don't challenge the criticism or attacking within the community people -- that is the card that will be played if we challenge things beyond privilege and we talk about labor situations, people lose jobs, they are traumatized, they don't have a small community that lifts them up in fiscal and optical ways. the success of the movement from black lives and the document that was produced would give

accountability for trauma maybe and actual losses people have in the struggle, the we do need full-time people who are paid to do the struggle as well as the community as a whole, if we want restorative justice let's model that not because of mainstream media but to internalize it and develop it in their own right. some comments to be quick. >> something i should have said earlier on but the folks who put a yield into this document and actually loves policy. i enjoy doing this and understand policy will not save us, not just because you put folks in this, part of a bigger organization, effort and struggle. it was a question we had. is this a policy issue? are folks doing it overnight?

nobody involved in this believe that policy, the only primary answer but part of this patchwork of ways that we have to change power in this country. >> some of the things you mentioned are the things we want to amplify through the program we have. this is a policy document but a lot of the solutions we are calling for an organizations working on this issue, that work doesn't necessarily mean the organizations are engaging in policy advocacy or anything. you mentioned the idea of restorative justice, great organizations in chicago that practice restorative justice, trying to build alternative

means to address harm. that work is happening and will continue to happen, the more you amplify it the more we take it to scale and spread across the country so i don't think anything you said is in disagreement to what is being put forth but uplifting that to take these to scale and for the record i hate the term minority. i am of the belief if you mean black, say black, say that. minority has a real -- it denotes that you are less than. >> in the context of our own media. my biggest problem associated with media, media that looks like me, that is part of the struggle. >> we had to be cognizant of

that. >> people in the back of the overflow, people raise their hands in here first. >> with social justice we deal with, deal with intersection our body in marginalized groups. how do we keep individuals accountable in a personal institution? the type of person i am, code, trying to keep someone accountable, that can shut someone down too. how can you have a discussion

about social justice when they are not acknowledging their players? >> i don't think so. that is a good question and a legitimate challenge. i am immediately thinking about creating a call in culture versus a callout culture, in the days of social media where you create a status, attack somebody in it, for whether the transgression is legitimate or not, the defaulting to finger pointing, very public, how dare you, manner of accountability can be conducive to that person shutting down and not hearing what you are trying to say, to take that in and transform

themselves or be cognizant of doing whatever it is. the call in culture is taking that, how you approach someone. when you take the act of calling someone in it can't be a knee-jerk. it has to be calculated, that we can communicate to this person in the future. without embarrassing them or humiliating them so they can hear what i am saying. you have to do checking within your self before doing that and going back to relationships, the first question is accountability, you can't do that if you are not in a relationship with someone. talking about those factors as a starting point.

>> my name is laura, really great event. police reform, in light of the baltimore police department, is this an opportunity for your reforms on your platform or do you think it will be more like what you said before, increased police budgets or body cameras, we won't help the situation or as an opportunity -- i wonder what your opinion is about that. >> when i think about police reform when i hear this term i automatically think about our beds written by a woman named miriam, called police reforms you should always oppose, and it is basically a list of eight

criteria to ask yourself when a work leisure form is used, criteria you should really think about, that is actually not the type of reform we need, to say yes, this is what we need. police reforms, euphemistic terms like community police, that still exist in police departments and different branches, any reform that is technological, body cameras, no to that too because that means more money is going to those police departments and technology is expensive. that technology is likely to be used more to increase surveillance rather than hold

them accountable. on the topic of body cameras and thinking how many videos of police executions have you seen this year? how many resulted in some type of accountability, however you might think about it? recording police executions or other forms of police misconduct doesn't lead to accountability so why should we keep pushing these false solutions out of need to reform the police? it doesn't work. i encourage everyone to google that article. consent decrees, whether they are helpful if that is the word to describe it or not, should be thinking about what recommendations are coming out of the decrees because they can vary within the police reform we

want to see. >> amen. the other thing, two thought, one is like the doj, we have seen in each of those, the police department across the country profile, they are racist and there is no accountability. the articulation of that problem by the federal government, the doj said come along and conservative progress and it helps connect with folks who might be part of this movement and in that way it is important but what is disappointing about the doj as it continues to funnel literally hundreds of millions of dollars to these department every single year with no accountability or conversation how many black folks you killed this year.

in places like oakland, the cops program led back into school so community oriented programs are deeply invested, the status quo as is. the consent degrees are attached to money. if we know that, if we fund a bunch of arduous processes, you are violating basic human rights, we as the government will not give you taxpayer money to do that. it would be an exciting moment to leverage its financial power to say we have these findings that are killing and hurting black and brown people. and overly powerful shift in the doj position but those reports in terms of diagnosis of the scope of the job but there was some money where their mouth is,

that is my expression. everybody put your money where your mouth is. >> i will take off the moderator had and organizer hat. that would be nice, i don't see that happening. .. so we talked about challenging the system, the police protective system and so there's kind of a catch-22.

>> my name is chip. on the managing director of justice programs here at the scene institute for public research. we are going to start off as executive session on the impact of policing reforms to local government. with a few words from one of the most important people in the room today, the mastermind at all the technology. [inaudible] >> i'd also like to know this session is being recorded. we asked of him to speak into

microphones when you're speaking to everyone online will be able to be. for those of us in virtually, we are streaming this. you can chat. also there will be opportunity as questions. it would like to ask the question, just need to press the star want on your phone. [inaudible] >> thank you very much. it's my pleasure to open up this executive session by introducing our president and chief executive officer catherine grady. catherine has been with cnn

since 1980 and if you look at your biography in your package will see she's had quite a distinguished career here with us. she is the recipient of the department of navy superior public service award for work that she did in desert shield and desert storm. she's an aspiring leader for all of us adequate support of the work that is being done in the justice grew. lease come up. >> so let me welcome you to see me. that's my job here today but i am very much looking forward to the afternoon in hearing what you have to say. and welcome to this executive session on policing to our topic today as chips it is the impact of policing reforms on local government. the first we're going to define the reforms under consideration for u.s. policing today. and then export from a variety

of local, right of local government perspectives, mayors, city managers, other partners and public safety. of the impact of these reforms is going to be. i'm very grateful we could have speakers who can speak to both the reforms of what it looks like or could look like from a local governments didn't want to thank you for coming today. and your time and energy that you put into danger and making this session happen. thanks to all of you in the room for being here, and those online who are joining us online. i thought i was it a little bit about what cna this. for those of you who don't know. i met a few people so far who do know seen it pretty well, but someway to ask me what cna stood for in a state for the center for naval analyses. i'll get into that in a little bit. we are a nonprofit institution that uses research and analysis to government be more effective. out approach is a little unusual

in the field of research and analysis and certainly in this town. and that it involves placing analysts with the action is happening. these are embedded analyst to support operations like combat and first responders but also exercises where you are training for these kinds of operations. and so the operators really like having an analyst close by. maybe not at first but certainly as they get used to it. but also those insights that they get an operational setting serve to influence the recommendations would openly provide. we have two parts to the organization. the first is the center for naval analyses which is the department of navy federally funded research and development center. the origins of the center dates back 75 years to the second world war. we are about to so but our 75th anniversary. and we developed some pioneering

analytical techniques to of military leaders defeat the u-boat threat. the other part is the institute for public research, goes by ipr. that's been around for some 25 years and they apply the same approach is on the defense side of the house but to nondefense agencies like the department of homeland security, like fema, department of education and, of course, the department of justice. our work for the department of justice is carried out by our justice group. i actually sit sometimes and call them adjusted league because that goes back to the focus on being on the ground. but anyway they cover a lot of topics as the group from ambushes on police to body-worn cameras and critical incident analysis. our action report from lessons learned from the las vegas metropolitan police department ambush incident is emblematic of

these reconstructions of incidents. it's a detailed and company to reconstruction and analysis of the events that occurred. while it's painful for those who were involved after relisted windier putting results together or we're talking to them about getting some of the david and getting a sense of what happened, though steps are important in minimizing the likelihood a repeat of these tragic events will occur. so like so many of you in the room and online, we are heavily involved in furthering the reform recommendations to the president's task force on 21st century policing. and as an aside i want to mention laurie robinson who served as the co-chair of the task force alongside chief ramsey, she is a member of cna board of trustees. the reforms we are focused on have to do with body-worn cameras, crisis intervention training, de-escalation

training, reality-based training, procedural justice and implicit bias training in office the wellness programs. business represents another trait of cna and that is to look at issues in the broadest possible life. in this case how police reforms affect local government officials. and these officials are partners of policing and public safety and it's important their perspectives are incorporated into these reform efforts. so again welcome to cna, and i'm going to turn it back over to chip in a minute. is going to introduce the session in more detail but i want to call out to people, special mention of two people. one is denise rodriguez. she is right in front. she is the coordinator and main driver of today's session. and then the so we won't have already met, and she's taking care of the technical aspects of this conference. so again welcome to cna. chip, i'm turning back over to you. thank you.

>> thank you very much katherine, for those thoughtful welcome remarks. it is very nice and gratifying to have your interest and support in the work that we do. so i'll be have of the justice group, or the justice league, and the safety and security division at cna i'm very proud to welcome everybody here this afternoon. and for for specific reasons i want to mention. this is actually the last session in our second series of executive session at cna. we have been doing this for two years now omelette and they've all been well attended by people with very diverse interests and it's by no means the last session ever. we will continue these sessions in the coming years. with this session focused on local government, we are branching out a bit from our common thing we've got about policing in america with these sessions.

we want to talk more about the interconnectedness of policing to other social institutions, and the need for systemic thinking about social problems and development. we have with us a very strong group of panelists today. with both a lot of experience and a lot of passion for the work that they do. i'm very proud to have them with us. and we are proud that this series, this executive series is totally funded by cna. while the work with government clients they did not take these sessions to us. these are our ideas, collaboratively generated so we are very proud about that. let's take a quick look at the topic and the agenda for today. this topic was influenced as i noted by our desire to branch out from police only topics. it was also influenced by conversations with leonard who is here with us today is a private consultant with the i

cna on matters pertaining to law enforcement and public safety. i think lindfors interest in our work at his help in shaping today's agenda. i think we can all agree police reform is a national topic and a national interest. it's not just an artifact of the media. i think we can all agree this is important to look at how to bring about change mms policing but it's also important to look at the impacts of changes in america policing. intended or unforeseen, to learn more about bringing change to policing and have them were companies and holistic view of these things. hence, our topic for today. the impact of policing reforms on local government. which we asked to consider a two-way relationship. certainly policing reforms should have impacts on local government, and local government

certainly has impacts on policing. we hope to export both aspects in our conversations this afternoon. today's agenda as bookends. we will start with the presentation from the local government respected, and we will end with a presentation from a policing perspective. i suspect we'll find some commonality in those perspectives but they are uniquely different perspectives or so to in between will hear from two panels of experts, first a panel of policing experts who will help bring some clarity to the types of reforms we're talking about, and we will offer their perspective on the relationship between policing reform of local government. next will do from a panel of local government and cost-benefit experts who offer their perspectives on the back of policing reforms. what do they expect to get from these reforms and at what cost. we have reserved time for questions at the close of each

speaker in each panel, so please let us know what's on your mind. we welcome questions and comments from a group of remote participants as well as from anybody in the room. before we begin with our first presenter, permit me commend it to thank everyone. our ceo katherine mcgrady and her leadership team, again thanks for your support and for their support, especially to 10, our executive vice president for the institute for public research, and dave kaufman, our vice president and director of the safety and security division. from which is the most amazing support for our work here at cna. to our presenters today the grace to accept our invitation to reply with our requests, for audiences here and go to encourage us with their presence, their intellect, their probing and their collegiality. and we are staff particularly,

erotica, denise, zoe, dominique, ashley, cindy, and several others who have worked hard to pull this thing to get over the past couple of months. so thank you one and all. now that you from our first presenter. i'm going to invite ron gould, former city manager from santa monica, california, to come up and address us on his thoughts about the impact of policing reforms on local government. as you can tell he's a former local government official. if you read his buyer ulysse easy leader, a writer, a teacher, a volunteer. he went to great trouble to come be with us today. we appreciate it very much. >> thanks. is a pleasure to be with you today. thank you for participating in this executive session. i think we need to start with

the why. why police reforms works why is this the subject? i think the answer which is abundantly clear to all of you is that we face a crisis of confidence in american policing these days. rarely does a week go by when there isn't a new national news story with an officer-involved shooting or the victim is a person of color who dies and then sparks community outrage. and despite tremendous improvements in crime suppression and declined in crime nationwide, largely over the last two decades, off the confidence in american policing has been dropping. and continues to drop. particularly amongst the poor, young people and people of color. and likewise, the police view of the people that there to protect and serve is also being harmed.

according to gallup research, currently 58% of white americans trust their police department. and only half african-americans feel the same way. and a total of 49% of all americans believe that the criminal justice system is biased. we all know many police officers who serve with integrity, that are just and on of the patch and the communities they serve. we know that. we also know that the systems and cultures of many police departments give rise to acts of brutality and violence and lethal acts that are far too common in american society, and care at the community fabric. the advent of handheld technology has made all too real and to public what has been occurring for far too long in our society.

680,000 law enforcement personnel in america are stigmatized with every viral video. so the police are losing confidence and legitimacy, and that is a threat to our civil society and to local government. and yet there's ample evidence that policing has never been more difficult and more demand, requiring highest levels of judgment, emotional maturity, and interpersonal skills. and, indeed, the backlash against our police officers but many at risk of bodily harm or worse. how do we make sense of these adverse trends and fax? i think it is time for us to re-examine our local police agencies from top to bottom. we must commit to comprehensive reform if we are to stem the tide of the loss of confidence respect and trust in american policing.

we must we that our law enforcement agencies in terms of both systems and culture. only by addressing the systems that undergird policing and sometimes malignant aspects of police culture can law enforcement regain its rightful place in society, and we prevent needless tragedies and losses. the president's task force on 21st century policing gives us a great guideline too many promising reforms and is a must read for elected officials, city managers and diminishes, police chiefs and sheriffs. i.c.e. agents people examine it and implementation guide to determine what reforms would be most appropriate in your local jurisdictions. and while systems and cultures are inextricably intertwined, i would like to parse some of the more prominent reforms for you this afternoon. so let's start with governance. sir robert peel to as many

people believe is the father of modern policing, 19th century british fellow had a principle that said the police are the public and the public are the police. the police by the public and the public are the police. and to that end with you operate a strong mayor form of government, or a commission oversees the police department t of whether your elected or appointed a chief, sheriff, what have you, you need to engage more deeply with policing because the stakes have never been more higher. this is more than budgeting, advocacy and legislation. now we need to talk about civilian oversight and new forms of civic engagement in order to reconnect the police with those they are to protect and serve. this is somewhat controversial, and the research has yet to show a causal relation between civilian oversight and improved policing come get the demands are great. in each community you're going

to need to figure out what level of civilian involvement if not oversight is appropriate for your community. is the police review boards, police review commission's? but what becomes very clear from the research is that involving the public more in function that otherwise have been closed off to the public is positive and healthy. that could include recruiting, training, policy making an ongoing dialogue on police community issues. review of a critical policies is now essential in all police agencies across the country. so whether you're an elected leader, an administrator or the chief you need to start looking at key policies that are not there, develop them and you need to do in concert with the communities served and are police officers and their unions if they are represented. the biggest what the court is use of force. in this we don't have a national standard. that is a debate that is upon us

now amongst the professional police associations. the police executive research forum has issued its own guidelines about what use of force policies should be nationwide. the international association of chiefs of police takes issue with recommendations didn't they go too far and will officers at risk. you need to engage in this discussion, engage your community and your officers, and find what is the right level, what is the right policy on use of force and then trained on it and enforce it in your communities. the same goes for consent before searches. in too many communities police although that lacks. you must ask permission and you must let the people know that the right to refuse it that has to be trained and part of an active policy. mass demonstrations have taught me lessons in america. some of them terrible lessons about how to avoid a peaceful demonstration becoming a riot. there are tactical and policy

lessons to be learned and you need to develop them way before that incident and the demonstration. we need to know how to protect people and exercised the first member rights and also protect of the civilians and the police themselves so that everyone's rights are protected and it doesn't degenerate into needless violence. you need to practice that. gender identification is becoming an increasingly big issue across america. we must respect people's gender identity and that means in the holding cells, into jails. we can't to bodily searches to determine gender. we have to be much more respectful. there is a prohibition on racial profiling. it is illegal in the united states, even though there is a prominent candidate for president who would like to institute it for a particular religion. it's illegal and it's wrong, after policies must indicate so and give us trained on it, if you must use discipline as

necessary. performance measures, it's -- what is measured is done. so you need to ask yourself what are you measuring in your police department? there may be unattended consequences for what you are measuring. you also need to ask yourself what are you doing with that information and is the public, does it have access to it? collection and reporting of data. police department generate a whole lot of data, some of it is more useful than others. you need to go back and audit and ask yourself are collecting the right david, are putting into some purpose and use, and how much of it is accessible to the public? how much are they going to report? and then there's the use of technology. technology is a bundle thing and it's also -- many forms of municipal service because it will always outstrip policy. was its body-worn cameras or drones or facial recognition

software or advanced uses of social media. the technology will always outstrip our ability to decide how and when to use it. so if you're going to embrace the technology you need to get out front and decide under what circumstances are you going to use it, how are you going to protect privacy, who gets to control it, how much of it is going to be a public, and what are essentially uses, what's off limits but you need to get clear on your technology policy. then you need to emphasize partnerships here because too often police departments operate somewhat in their own side is separate from the rest of the organization and believe that they and they alone can keep order and prevent crime in the community. that's absolutely false. unless the police departments -- other community agencies, other city departments, community mental health, the schools,

nonprofits, social services and the like, you'll never -- and so you need to emphasize your policies and practices. one thing the research is showing is the public cares just as much about how it is treated as outcomes. is the public wants the police to catch the bad guys and prevent crime and disorder of the public also wants procedural justice. your policies have to be rude in procedural justice. let's go to recruitment. we need to change the way we recruit for police officers. this is an incredibly important role in us aside and recruiting is getting particularly hard these days. not so many people want to be police officers anymore. we need to recruit people who are more reflective of the communities they are going to serve. as vesely said. that's harder to do. one thing you can do is ask the community to recommend people who might become good police officers. after that horrific situation in

dallas, where five officers were gunned down by a madman, the police chief put out a call to the community. they had many vacancies in the dallas police force, and as for the committee to come forward with applicants, people who might be good police officers. hundreds stepped forward. more cities and police agencies need to ask the community for whom might be a good police officer. it's not just about racial and gender equity. it's also about age and language and life experience and cultural experiences. we need diversity an in all thee areas if we're going to really reflect the communities we are to protect and serve. we must be aware of old stereotypes about what makes for a good cop. those often get in the way of our recruitment efforts. we need more women in law enforcement. there's more and more evidence that women perform just as well as men and better in many situations.

they generate less complaints for excessive force. take it higher performance evaluations your they do much better in domestic violence situations. we need more women in law enforcement, and we've got to focus our recruitment efforts accordingly. vendor selections. don't do a good job of selecting amongst the candidates we get. we often make terrible mistakes. one suggestion that leonard matarese have spoken to is we need to involve more assessment centers besides the interview process and the background check. assessment centers to test judgment in real life situations so you could see whether or not this person is just a good interview of whether this person is going to perform well under pressure that can occur any day, a police officer. you might consider using the public as raiders, if they're properly trained, and actors in the assessment center. you've got to do your deep background checks for judgment,

temperament, honesty, into the, interpersonal skills, emotional maturity and tolerance. and you ought to give preference for community involvement the the people that are already volunteering should get first choice, should get additional consideration. training, it was mentioned as one of the biggest reforms possible and necessary in an american policing. it should start with the principles of community policing the community policing show that has been around since the '80s to its cost of many different forms. we all know that community policing isn't a fat. it isn't a program. it isn't an approach. it isn't a strategy. it's a philosophy of how a lease our civil society. you need to start the training with that and ended and constantly reinforces throughout the officer's career. particularly the notion that we are guardians, stewart's of civilization rather than warriors.

and this gets to larger issues. we have to avoid the tendency towards militarization. yes, it's easy to get military equipment donated from various levels of the federal government and a president obama has put some limits on that, that we've gone too far enough to make of our police forces look like occupying forces. and so we need to step back and go back to the universe can even if we were in the body armor under it so that we don't look like military warriors and instead we are guardians, we are protectors. dignity and respect for all has to be the watchword for all training from the initial training that you get in the academy to the field training you receive as an officer and remedial training to dignity and respect for all. that's what we're going to win back the trust and confidence. reality-based training and crisis intervention training. these have proven to vastly improve that the choice of

police officers make under great stress, under terrible conditions. and by using the new technology it can be more efficient and we can make real changes that avoid tragic decisions and horrible losses. teaching police officers how to deal with those with mental disabilities is essential. we have a mental health crisis in america. we all know that. it's been going on since the '80s but officers don't not recognize certain symptoms and behaviors as being indicative of certain mental illnesses they may overreact or react incorrectly and make the situation quite worse. de-escalation that alternatives to arrest have to be taught right alongside how to take control of the situation and how to do the hard work. have to be equal in training period because contrary to the current notion which is that the officer must step up and easily, and the situation and put down

any resistance sometimes stepping back, buying time, getting distance, getting reinforcement is a much better strategy elites do far better outcomes. implicit bias training is now essential. most people know what racial discrimination is. most people would say that they don't hav have a discriminativee in their bodies, but all of us have innate biases that we may or may not be aware. training officers to know when they're acting on the implicit bias and to know how that is being read by others is critical to the success in various communities. that i think you need ongoing self defense courses. most police academies you get about eight hours of self-defense and very little in the rest of your career. the officers that are very confident about their ability to defend themselves are often the last ones to use it to its counterintuitive but it's true so we need to invest in debt. practices, practice community policing the you know what this

is. it the officers out of the cars, getting into the neighborhoods, leave them aside in the neighborhood long enough to begin to know the key actors in neighborhood. create schedules with her is time for them to interact with the local grocers, with the kids on the sidewalk with a local homeowners, the people that are around all the time. this builds the community cohesion, builds trust and offices, told the officers obtained information that is necessary to prevent crime and suppress it. this is the key to community policing. too often we get away from it and officers feel they don't have time because they're waiting for the next call. we need to get back to these principles. partnerships and relationships as i mentioned our essential to promoting non-enforcement activities. we've got to see our officers interacting with the public come in when it is a time for a citation or arrest but, you know, a hostile situation.

that will build our confidence. we need to engage the police department and community white efforts didn't with the root causes of crime. endemic social issues such as poverty, such as homelessness, such as poor health care and weak education. the police can't solve these problems but it out to be part of the there is institutions and organizations that are working hard to solve them. they have to be at the table. they have a lot to offer. these people voice during interaction about being new to this is a tough one but officers need to be trained and assisted so that they can let people blow ofoff steam. you let people be insulting and act horribly without overreacting and escalating it. this is something that we need to train and insist upon, and they need to be more transparent about the decision-making to this is what i'm doing this, because of that. they have to be logical and

fair. you should do regular surveys of attitude towards the police department and published results. we published results of crime trends all the second we measured and year to year. cities need to do the same thing with the attitudes towards their police departments. it's not that expensive. we should collect data on the use of force, officer involved shootings, and we need to report it. that information should be immediately accessible and we should share with the our agencies. there should actually no profiling. we should collect data on stops, searches and seizures so we can examine to make sure that we are not profiling as we go. there should be no quotas whatsoever for tickets or for citations or arrests come particularly as regards revenue. ferguson was the most outrageous example where in 2013 ferguson with a five of 21,000 had 33,000 outstanding warrants for arrest.

it was all revenue driven. it was essential to the budget strategy of the city and the city manager i'm sad to say. you need to provide no tolerance for racism for sexual misconduct or harassment. none whatsoever. and incentivized his activities. get the officers out there reading to the kids, mentoring the kids, the coaches. he got to find ways to make a part and parcel of the duty if we are going to get the youth back on the side of the police officers and develop another generation that will possibly want to become police officers one day. we need to recognize that the lgbtq community has suffered tremendous harassment and assault for many years oftentimes at the hands of our police, and we need to rectify that. we need to provide the best possible equipment to our officers to keep them safe whether body armor, tactical first aid kits, whether it's weaponry, whether it's the best uniforms, as communication

equipment. we cannot script on this. we've got to provide robust health care including mental health intervention for our police officers because police officers tend to suffer more than the general population from depression, poor health, alcohol and drug dependence, divorce, suicide. we need to keep it active on our police officers and help them and provide wellness programs. body-worn cameras, i think they're becoming the national standard to yes, there's pushback by a number of police unions, yes, there are a lot of issues that have to be worked through as far as the initial cost, how it is stored, who gets access to it, privacy couple of these things have to be worked out but i think we're moving there as a nation. i think there are quite a few departments now with the officers believe the body-worn cameras are actually an asset and help them against the public is sometimes is not reasonable and makes fabricated

accusations. external independent investigations of police misconduct in police shootings are essential. the public does not trust the police to investigate the police. there needs to be somebody outside who is neutral look at the police contacted this to be any credence by the public. you must come if you have any trust by the minority and immigrant communities you must separate immigration policy from law enforcement. many chiefs associations have been vocal about that for 20 years. time and i could communications about major police activities, yes, you don't want to ruin an investigation. yes, there are privacy concerns. yes, there are a lot of legal hurdles but you need to get out there. too often something terrible happens and its report over and over for four or five days by the local press, the public is disgusted that it's all over the internet and the blogosphere in the police department has yet to

even comment the that can't go on. regular opportunities to the public and officers both to be heard. five minute warning. okay. we need to get better about having the opportunity for police to go out and talk to the public which can be angry can which can be confrontational and at the same time we got here from our officers because they have an equally important you. fiscal impacts of all of this are quite considerable. if you undertake this comprehensive reform of this going to cost you more to recruit, retain and comments to your employees. equivalent will cost more affordable cost more to self-insure. consider the alternatives. to the risk analysis. if you don't prevent these deaths and injuries, if you have the cost of liability payouts come together cost of settlement agreements, if you have lost commerce and tourism, if you receive drops in poverty guns and push for community pride or

lost opportunities for civic progress to to fear and distrust, the cost of imported when police department are just too great. the opportunities to see cost sharing and collaborative government are great of a dependable talk about this. mutual aid, consolidation, join together for training purposes, joint use of equipment and to use of management and administer overhead costs. you have a fine series of speakers and panelists this afternoon. i commend them to you and to help that at first the discussion. but please let's lead to action because i'm quite convinced that this crisis in confidence in american policing gets worse i the month. thank you very much applause t the. >> we have time for a question or two.

>> congratulations. one of the questions that i had -- [inaudible] the second problem has been trying to answer the calls for service versus having officers available to spend time in communities? >> and acknowledging that most police departments are quite small. 50% other police departments have less than 10 officers. 75% have less than 25 when you u are taking office all day to go into this training you are lowering the service level. absolutely. and so this is where the chief and the manager have to be clear about what the priorities are. insurance are lowering the cost

for some the specialized trainings, these simulators are very expensive. i would not expect those cities could ever begin to reach the cost of owning there. however if you form a consortium of local governments, the cities and counties together share these, some of the mover in areas so you get your time on them, and check to make time for your officers to go work on them. it will pay you dividends down the road. and so these are some of the very difficult decisions that have to be made with a budget in mind with the city priorities but again the stakes are just too i got to properly train and support and equip our officers. thank you. >> thank you. great opening period fantastic information. you were former city manager --

>> i managed for cities and worked in police issues in massachusetts but predominantly california. >> fantastic. can you tell me generally across the for cities that you managed what percentage of your general fund was the combined police, fire budget speak with please, fire budget represents a majority of the general fund expenditures foremost full-service cities. in california and ugly across the country. between the police and fire generally 60, 70%. >> thank you. >> you bet. one last question. [inaudible] >> is there still some marketing did you on that? is a more about finding resources? >> i think that they're still quite a few elected and

appointed officials, including my colleagues, who believe that there are terrible things happening in other cities that will never happen in their cities or towns. they believe that their police are playing at a different level and absolute -- with their public is another these tragedies could happen in their city or town until they do. and so i do believe that there are many local officials that think that there are other priorities they would rather deal with private investing in police reforms. >> all right, thank you. [applause] >> that was indeed a very good start. and rod gould took time out of a very busy schedule to be with his so he has to run off which is what i wanted to get those questions and. so thank you again. we ask a lot of our presenters. so i'm going to ask my next panel to come up, know already, joe, rodney.

while they are coming up on was a couple words about how we run the sessions. you saw that reflect a five minute warning up for rod. when we have four people on a panel like this, each of you could probably deliver a semesters with the material on the topics they're going to talk about, they have just about what our tickets to all of the comments and that type of question. so we limited to about 10 to 12 and for each presentation and that is the big challenge. we need to get to all presentations. please do not be offended if we start flashing the sign that you. most of you are familiar with this. i think what i'm going to do is just take a few minutes to introduce the entire panel and then i will turn it over to know to start us off. so we have noble ready, who's the chief of police in practice accountability initiatives at the cops office, newly

established unit that i think about primarily for the need to institutionalize the reforms but also a lot to do with collaborative reform and critical incident response. but he is the presidential appointee who is leading the charge on implementation of reforms in the task force. that's no small task believe you me. he has got 3 three years of service as a police officer he rose to achieve in the madison, wisconsin, police department. his passion is what he calls trustful policing. he served at the police leadership institute in lowell, massachusetts. is a certified trainer and several other national recognized training firms. and he served a stint as the board president for united way of dane county. a tremendous amount of

experience. a tremendous amount of passion for the work we are doing. following him will be joel mchale who is a major in the kansas city police department. we know joe and we respected joe in large part because he headed up are smart policing initiative in kansas city called the no files allies and did a tremendous job. dyed in the wool police officer who can set a vision and make things happen like i've not seen any other person to in a long time. very impressive. i think other thing i want to say about you is he spun one of police officers in the country, one of the very few who can go around the country and teach people about social network analysis. so this is presented to him as part of the police initiatives, pretty sophisticated analytical approach to understanding social networks and gain networks. working within an interrupting them, he embraced it as they please manager and supervisor.

he really dug into the statistical techniques and i told you about social network analysis. very conversant on the. following him will be harold madlock also someone just under three years extremes in law enforcement. he recently spent three years as the police chief in fayetteville, north carolina, and other collaborative reform and other initiatives he has brought a tremendoutremendou s amount of reform and positive change to that department. tremendous crime reduction and he is shown great leadership in fayetteville. we will end up with rodney monroe. rodney this result by the chief of the charlotte-mecklenburg please department. he was a point in that role in 2008. he's got a similarly lengthy resume in law enforcement including richmond, virginia, washington, d.c. police department.

so he's got a ton of experience as well. so noble, why don't you lead us off and please be mindful of the time. >> i certainly well. and thank you for the introduction. welcome and really happy to be a. as always with didrex e&a, i struggle what angle to take, take at this. the issue is reforms, and leaving the policing practices and accountability initiative i've had ample opportunity to talk to law enforcement all over the united states. the question that keeps coming to my mind in the earlier speaker talked about it, why change? why change the 18th of 90,000 law enforcement agencies equal number of people heading those. why change? i think many of us are aware of the force change from the fear of change, in fear, experience if you don't change the lawsuit, high profile video that's on tv at night.

so that's one way to understand a lot of time talking about that because i think we all understand that part. but i do think there are probably three of the ways that i've heard law-enforcement executives and law-enforcement leaders across the united states talk about why they're doing something to why they are leaving reforms but why their change. one is constant improvement the individually or collectively if they want to improve. it's a personal belief that a consulate want to improve. second is transformation, to know there's a changing dynamic inside the agency and outside of the agency. in order to keep up with what's going on, in order to meet what's happening that you must change. a quick example when i joined policing 30 years ago we were talking about things like diversity and inclusion. to become to embracing diversity. then we got to valuing diversity and that we talk about things like bias. if you are not preparing your agency for reforms, because you

know that will happen, you have to be a transformational leader. i hear leaders talk about that. then i will talk about reforms. reform a system standpoint and from a personal standpoint because i think these are all reasons that i'll give you some of the challenges that we are seeing across the united states as relates to reform. taking a step in my career i cut my teeth on total quality management. total quality management there were certain things that people believe in from a personal standpoint that you believe in constant improvement. that arguably been constant improvement but you from systems and processes before you blame people. that you lead a 95% of the people that you lead as well you have seen few of the committee. your work is customer driven. if you are resting some of them into giving him a ticket for you giving up an award to an officer, its customer driven. had to meet or exceed customer expectations? you view every contact, every

contact as a reason to meet or achieve customer expectation. it's a plan to check mentality. i bring this up and i talk about it because i have found the agency that leaders that grab ethic, that mentality, that it's not just that high profile after action report but it is when you have that individual contact, when you look at improving training, when you're looking at improving communication. people that do this are constantly in a state of reform and improving. it's a plan to mentality. transformation. the whole issue with conservation is not just transforming the agency but constantly assessing where your agency is, the person of the resources, people, diversity, a host of things and asking yourself where do we need to be in two years, the reduced to four years? then work collectively to get

there. what i see as a longtime sometimes we get overly focused internally, forget external. i do have to tell anyone that changing dynamic outside in our communities are just unbelievable. when i started as a chief of police, not talking about dark cam, not talk about public safety tweet, talk about black lives matter and we're not talking about the ferguson sector all of these things on it and just be dynamic and stay on top of the ticket to reforms. policing reforms, policing practices of one of the major initiatives is collaborative reform. let me talk about that. reforms are usually tied to different issues and topics. what we're tying to get at his best practices, evidence-based approach is, principle driven approaches as well as constitutional policing. they manifest themselves in community policing, training officers and de-escalation and

training office of best practices that use of force, increasing diversity of our law enforcement agents and approving data collection and transfer the. that's how these things manifest themselves. a positive part i think about reform and there are number of them, collaborative reform and reform is that it gives us as a profession a way of looking at as they feel the what is our collective wisdom as to where we need to be? if you look at the 21st century policing recommendations and you follow those 58 recommendations, essentially that's the collective wisdom of the field and sank this is where we need to be as relates to reforms. it also impose collaborative reform processes give us a process to work through these things. so we can work systematically and in a transparent fashion. there are challenges with reform. the arson charges. let me talk about those. most reforms, collaborative

reforms as -- if i don't do this, and i will get in trouble. if i don't do this, this risk aversion. when talking to achieve or a mayor or someone across the united states, the sense is if, can i avoid not doing this? am i going to get in trouble if i don't do this? is a grade a consent degree of pattern or practice? no. you do it because it's the right thing to do. it still has that risk aversion feel to it. because with reforms, you focus on those very formal systems like training, policy, practices and procedures and equipment. sometimes we overemphasize those and would lose out on one of our biggest, i call it a blindside. we lose out on the informal culture in focusing on how to focusing on how do we change that, what do we do? so we can change of policy,

change of procedure but are changing what office are actually doing? are we changing what we really do? are we changing how people perceive what we're doing? i think we lose out on the informal culture. the other challenge that i see with reforms is that it's very hard, i think the early speaker talked about this here it is you can not do a systemic broad like a collaborative reform without invite you having for things on board. one is left of local government support because you'll need the resources. you have to have leadership that's willing to step up and open themselves up and have the courage. three, community stakeholders that are watching, monitor and holding people accountable. and then force you also have to have the rank-and-file bite into it, the culture, that they are also part of that accountability mechanism that takes place. we do understand the chief is supposed to lead and be the catalyst for making this happen

but the reality is that if change is going to take place you've got to have community members involved in this. i think one of the things we have to do in a collaborative reform or reform standpoint, we have to figure ways to engage the community in a systemic way. if i think we can do an independent review of a department, and objective independent review, but i do think it's important if you can work citizens into the implementation and monitoring that that would help us and go on long way with accountability and improving reforms. the other thing i will mention that makes a reform of makes a reform of challenge is that usually when law enforcement or the justice department so what is called in to deal with reforms, something tragic has happened to there's a lot of hurt feelings that are taking place. finding that way of reconciliation without blame, finding that we did talk about these issues for change without there being such a dynamic that

you can't get past it, that hurt that exists. so what does it look like with two agencies? there are a number of agents the event and fought with reform and a lot of these pop out of the. los angeles company las vegas, nevada, a just completed collaborative reforms process. they are further along than any of our agencies from the department of justice that is done that. here's some of the outcomes of las vegas. the success of completed 98% of the recommendations identified which is not easy. as result they created an office of internal oversight to implement the recommendations. ..

>> you have the external oversight, community involve: both agencies had resulted. they significantly lower officer-involved shootings. in 2014, the department just averaged 2.5. they went from 4 spoi 3 a month to 2.5 -- 4.3. that is very impressive. they happened constant improvement and put together an internal working group that would review their use of force and gets back to the plan, do check act. we can't wait on reform.

it has to be about the way we do business. thank you. [applause] >> good afternoon. i am the commander of the kansas city police department and a third generation law enforcement officer and spent the last 25 years in the most vol volatile areas in kansas. we are viewed as confidant, capable and progressive but we as an organization have been unable to impact the crime that is destroying the fabric of the community. the reform recommendations of the 21st century policing task force and the collaborative effort of law enforcem, prosecutors, social service providers and community members have allowed us to take strides to built trust in the community. the kansas city, missouri prius department has engaged in a

multi faceted violence reduction strategy that engages services and support to those deemed at-risk for violent crimes. police historically have been an agency that was feeding the pipeline to prison and a segment of our community that had been s seg seggregated long before i came along. -- sin kansas city, we are able to use social network analysis.

violence spreads like a disease and those individuals connected to violence crime increase their odds of becoming a victim themselves. we can see this on a piece of paper and use it to drive the decision making process. by identifying individuals that are central to violent networks the kansas city police department can drive intervention strategies and focus on prevention and engagement rather than arrest and prosecution. one of the greatest concerns about technology is the spiraling cost associated with it. in kansas city it cost less than $5,000 to drive this intelligence model that shows you the .5% of people in the community that are causing the majority of the problems. this is a key ingredient by making our more efforts surgical and focused the random shotgun approach of proactive policing can become a thing of the past.

we pride ourselves on being an agency with excellent training and tactics immolated across the united states. retreat is not in our volunteer and never will be. it has led to the most tactical process of all officers in the united states. by training officers to diffuse a lethal confrontation rather than result to lethal force are officers are placing them in better positions of safety while not allowing the threat to escape or cause further harm. just because the law says you can justifiable take a life doesn't make it right. a culture shift occurring and we have better for it. kcpd under went a shift. an an order to each commander

was issued that we would eliminate the position of community interaction officer. initially, our community was like why are you doing this? what is wrong? the fact is the cio's had become a position that hammered our efforts to further involve our officers with the citizen as they serve. it had become a crutch for others not to engage because that is what the cio is for. our department is now walking down a new path and the greatest commodity we are looking is we must learn to triage our work better. our civic partners are the key to this process. i supervise the patrol vision that is one of the most violent in the united states with a murder rate 11 times the nag national average. i have 155 officers that answer thousands of calls a year.

just in the past three weeks, they have been violated assault, pin downed by fun fire, two suffered concessions, one bit by a human and one had an ak-47 pointed at them. they are being assaulted and trau traumatized on one call and expected to embrace the society on the next call. we must understand the challenges placed on the officers and provide support without labeling them as weak. the president's 21st generation force task generated 96 item acs based on six pillars. i am sure most agree the hundred page document, sending them on their way with a new mindset a challenge. however, that same police officer can be impacted through specific direction and

leadership of the organization itself to meet the recommendations in the report without them knowing it. in closing, i want to share a short story on a challenge we face. late last night i received an e-mail, a letter from a citizen in the community who related that i was failing as the commander of the east patrol vision. he suggested to me i would succeed if i would give each officer three extra pair of handcuffs, send them into the neighborhood and tell them not to come back until they were filled. my point is there must be a concerted effort beyond law enforcement it address the biases and misconceptions in the community and how to engage that. our civic leaders and partners in local government are the key to bridging those gaps. thank you. [applause] >> good afternoon, i am herald

med lock with the fayetteville police department in fayetteville, north carolina. i want to start by saying i have worked for seven different police chiefs in my career. the last three i learned a great deal from as i rose to the rank and then the very last one was probably the most demanding but i learned the most from him and took a lot of what i learned to fayetteville, north carolina. so i was brought into fayetteville, i just want to tell you my story. i was brought into fayetteville, north carolina as a result of a great division between the police department and the community we serve. in 2012, the department went through something called driving while black and it was a search problem. there was a great deal of mistrust, not just from the

community toward the police department, but from the police department toward the community. a great disconnect. in 2012, our officers were involved in seven deadly force incidents in a city of 225,000. 2013, i took over in february, we already had two and we had two more after my arrival. it was an interesting time. so as i began to try to make sh change in the department -- some -- what i came to realize is this: it comes down to will. the will of the leader to make change. and the will of the leader to be unyielding and unbending. i learned that from this guy to my left specifically because i saw him do it in our department before i left. joe became unyielding in my

desire to change and transform the department. really, at that time i was using the word trance form and we would transform who we are, what we look like, and how we are perceived by the community. those early months we made a lot of changes. i have to admit not many of them were well accepted by the rank and file. all 434 members in my department at one time and i told them in six months the community would like me just fine. they may hate the police department but they will like herald medlock a lot. you can come along with me and we can begin to change who we are and what we look like or i would be out there by myself. we made great changes earlier on. i want to give you this fact and i will fill in the blanks. since october of 2013 we have had one officer-involved deadly

use of force where an individual opened fire on the officer and he returned fire and took that individual's life. so we are almost three years, everybody knock, to having just one officer-involved shooting and that was involved with a middle age white guy. that has not been easy. as we begin to make change, i engaged or got more and more resistance from the department, from the rank and file and from many of my commanders. what i found was when you are in a department for 20-25-30 years you close ranks and everything from your perspective, and i am speaking from previous non-chief perspective, everything looks pretty good. it can't be what the community really says that it is because

we know the facts. we are the cops and know best for the community. whatever the community is saying doesn't matter because we know best. we are the professionals. about eight months into my tenure in faithful i learn offend the collaborative process in las vegas and pulled that report and looked at it and recognized there was an opportunity for us to have a fresh look at what we were doing in our city and in our police department by a group of professionals that are us who look like us and who talk like us. so i began to pursue that opportunity to be one of those collaborative reform process departments. now, that in itself, when you say i am pursuing the department of justice to come in and help us, is like saying i am going to the irs and asking for an audit.

so, from our many in our city government, there was concern about that. the only time the department of justice comes in to help a police department is not usually at an invitation but as the result of a nightmare that occurred that bad day. we wield that to happen by pursuing the department of justice and the folks with the collaborative reform process to work with us. i badgered ron davis, the office dire direct director, for several months and i think he relented to get me out of his hair. it was met with suspicion from inside the department, across the city government, and believe it or not from across the community. there is a group, probably not

as large now as it was two and a half years ago, but there was a group that simply thought we were trying to white wash our problems. we are trying to put a bandaid and cover an old wound. as we began the process, many in the department recognized absolutely this was not going to be a white wash job and many in city government recognized that. then the questions came from across the street as we called city hall, how much is this going to cost? and we continued with the process. one of the things we did early on was engage every member of our command staff in the collaborative reform process. so when the 76 recommendations came out about nine months ago those people had already been

involved in working thew many of the details and information that the group from cna and doj provided and we began to learn from ourselves the things we needed to change. as the recommendations started bubbling up, and the final report coming out with the 76 recommendations, we were on our way to recognizing understanding many of the reforms we needed to make in our department. we engaged the community in that process, they became believers in the collaborative reform process. we the -- we engaged our city government and they became believers as well. we have been able to do this with very little money, without a great deal of cost, because we are using the resources of the government. we are also traveling to learn from other departments, bring in

other departments into teach us some of the things they are doing. it has been a relatively painless process. it has been a relatively inexpensive process. one of the early questions, and again, i just want to share the story, one of the early questions was chief, this is going to cost us millions of dollars. and my response was so will one lawsuit. we cannot afford not to do what why endeavoring to do and we received that buy-in. so we are not there yet. we have about 90% of the recommendations. the 76 recommendations completed, sent to the department of justice, our partners, and the team here, cna. and they are reviewing and have reviewed most of it. we have put in place recommendations, suggestions, and training that came from

this. what if i have seen over the last eight months is really interesting in the department. he have transformed our department not reformed our department. we became something many in the fayetteville police department never thought we would become. we send community meetings without yells and police officers against the back of the wall guarding those who are speaking. we end meetings with hugs now and when you do that you begin to transform. doesn't mean we have quit the hard job of policing but what it does mean is we are doing the right things at the right time for the right reason.

not doing things that are legal and according to policy. three and a half years ago, we were very policy-driven. as long as the officer followed policy and the legal opinion they were thought to be okay. legal and according to policy doesn't mean good or right. now we have become that just departme department. we have issues and problems but are trying to police in a right manner for the right reasons. then following good policy and law for the right reason. so we transformed ourselves. last night we were attending a large community meeting and going into the meeting, the issue was police and the community. what it ended up being with many of the political figures in the

city and council that confronted the room, turned out to be an economic development and one part of the city discussion and skewering and where are we going to put that new baseball stadium. so we transformed ourselves with the community while it sounds good were a chief to tell you we have transformed. it is rewarding to have officers say, you know, chief, they actually like us. we are part of the community. so about four months ago we sat down with a group of officers and we said you know, we need to change who we are by telling folks what we are and what we believe. our slogan if you will now is this: one agency, one community, one family, one. that is who we are in