relationship, it's like, hey, i know what's good for you, i'm patrolling the community, you do not know anything. i know what's best for you. instead of allowing the community to have a seat at the table and actually have a stake and voicing their opinions. what's going to work for them and help them. instead of coming to the table and telling them look, we know what you need we know that you need more police officers. we know that you need certain manpower and certain hot spots instead of allowing the community to come to the table and really truly within to their voices and allowing them to tell you what is it we need to improve the relationship between police and community throughout this nation. and finally, the last thing i'll touch on is the role that unions play within this conversation that we need to have. and i'm pretty sure you guys have been following what's been occurring in new york city. and unfortunately, the union leader for the nypd is not as conducive to a positive

environment as it can be. and one of the things that occurs is these incendiary comments that are coming from the union leaders that actually worsen the situations instead of improving it. and what happens is some of the comments from union leaders achieve the opposite of what the union leaders want to achieve. they actually make police officers' lives more -- put them at more risk. so i think it'll be great for unions to understand that our job is to protect our members. but, you know, our job is to also serve the public and their voice matter and certain things they feel, if they feel like certain things are occurring, a way that it's not supposed to we should take heed to that and listen to them. >> thank you, sir. >> sorry, thank you. >> thank you very much. i want to thank the panel for your testimony and for being here today. now, i turn it over to task force members for any questions they may have for any of the panelists and we'll start with the chief. >> i want to thank you all for

taking the time to be here today, very good comments. i think that mr. st. jermaine your comments particularly touched home with me. and it's never too late to be a police officer. and i think that we need people from communities such as yourself. and so what i'm asking you about is maybe some suggestions that you could provide on recruiting efforts. because one of the things that we have trouble doing, you know, we all talk about diversify of the police force, but you brought forward some of the exact obstacles that we face and what has been brought to the forefront in this is the distrust and the separation at times with the police department and the communities that we desperately want representation from and the viewpoints from. how do we bridge that gap and get over that wall so that we can do the proper recruiting we need to bring those viewpoints in? >> well thank you very much, first of all.

and, you know, i do still think about becoming a police officer -- >> tucson's hiring. >> but, you know, it's a great question. i think first of all it's not going to happen overnight. it's going to take some time. and i think a part of it is to truly make a genuine effort, extending our hands to the community and allowing them to again, voice their opinion and letting them know that it needs to be a partnership. we need them. and we need them at the table. and their voices matter. and, you know, and we take what they have to say and how they view things and how they think things should be done in the community. we take them seriously. you know, i think just like everything else you do in life is that you have to basically give the community members or

some people from the communities a reason to want to become police officers. i think when there's such a deep level of distrust between the community and police departments throughout the nation it's really hard to get great individuals making a difference and changing the culture to become police officers. and i think we have to extend our hands to them and engage in some things by doing outreach work. and not just you know, posting things in the subway, on the buses and online, but actually going to the community and having regular conversation with folks. you know, we have in common than we think. and i think sometimes, again

police officers have difficult jobs. if we can just show the community that we understand and we listen to them, we care about them, we're there for them, i think that will change the mindset of the community and more kids and young people will want to become police officers. it is an honorable job. there's no doubt about that. you get to save our society's most vulnerable people. we have to reach out and connect with them, whether i'm white, black, yellow, green, we all feel the same. we need to understand each other. that's where the conversation needs to start. and then we can get to the phase where we recruit more community members to be police officers. >> thank you. >> can i add to that? >> yes. yes. >> so in a community that i grew up in southern california, oxnard, we had what was called the police activities league. and a lot of the and things like

that, and that allowed for police officers to build and trusting relationships. and so no longer was that such and such over there but it was coach flores or coach brown. and for me i grew up as an alternative to gangs and violence in my community. i grew up playing basketball. and so i create programs where for young people that are detained as well as detention alternatives where we place them in environments that are going to allow them to thrive and be outside of their community. so looking at it through a wholistic approach but certainly, i know for us in our community, just simplifying things because we could get into our work and what we do but just going back to jim, he reminded me of a lot of things that did work in my community and that was the fact that there were police officers that truly cared that would come after. and they wouldn't show up in their uniform. didn't create this like this

sense of us versus them, but created a sense of all of us. >> thank you. >> thank you. tracy is next followed by sue. >> hi, thank you so much for your heart felt and compelling comments. i wanted to point out before i ask you, ms. perez, a question it was gratifying for me to hear how much the comments of mr. winkler and mr. st. jermaine and their ideas were congenial to the ideas and theory offered about procedural justice. and the first panel mr. winkler, you didn't specifically use those words you used reconciliation and restoration, but it's pretty much i think, you know, this idea of reform is consistent. here's my question. in your written testimony you mentioned two things. decentralization as an important key to repairing trust between

individuals and then you have an idea about the federal mandate for system wide accountability for juvenile and criminal justice systems. i was particularly curious about decentralization given that the first panel was making comments, i think, in the opposite direction. you know, the idea that we might need to look to more centralization, you know, uniform ideas for standards for policing. so if you could say a little bit about what you mean by decentralization in your recommendation, that would be helpful. and if we have time, the federal mandate on what that is. thank you. >> definitely. i think decentralization in the sense of having community policing. and so very similar to the police activities league. not necessarily having this one institution oversee everything. but really get -- i was in the probation department. i was recruited into probation because of my the programming i

created in the community. and a lot of what we did is i was able to become that community liaison, right? so often times, when i think about decentralization, i felt often times police officers or probation officers aren't equipped with the community resources. they don't know what's access accessible or available to them. and that leads into my federal mandate on system accountability, which i've talked to brian about. he was part of our three-day conference call. and one of the things i really do see is i was a part of a system that was held accountable. and it was a way in which we were hired. so not everybody came from law enforcement. our training. we had to do the strength-based approach. we had to do different types of trainings i felt equipped me to be the best probation officer i could be. i feel why is there a system that's working in one community, yet the neighboring county is

the complete opposite, which is punitive, right? it's not held on restorative justice practices, it's not necessarily looking at doing victim offender dialogues, not necessarily looking at doing gender responsiving for young women, understanding that women need to be served differently than men as well as redirecting some of the money that comes into law enforcement. back into the community. it's a dream of mine, i know that with many people here in this room, we could achieve that. but i would love to you know, have more of an offline conversation. but definitely looking at how we could reduce racial disparities within a system on a front level. i'll just tell you a quick story and i'll end. but when i was a probation officer we used to use the risk assessment. and that is an objective tool. and i know that new york tries

to use it. but as an intake officer, a young person screened then a probation officer, then it's done. people are screened immediately so that you could eliminate them from being put into a detention center. my first position within probation was an intake officer and i did gender responsive programming as a -- as holding all female gang case load. but when i would get calls from officers from police officers my young girl was going to be transported into the probation or the juvenile hall, i would risk them in my head and inform the police officer that was not necessary. that there was actually a community program that was going to be accepting them at this time. and so it's things like that. stepping -- i mean, we could do so much better if we wanted to. and i think that's what we're here for. >> thank you very much. >> okay. i'll start with ms. perez first. i really appreciated your

comments about the program and those types of resources to make a connection with young people in the community that might not have had a good exchange with police officers. can you talk a little bit more about your objection to having police officers in the schools? and you had specifically mentioned school resource officers. in my experience, from the police side, i found that my officers that worked in the schools the officers were transformed by their experience interacting with the kids in a positive environment. i wanted to see if you could clarify whether you should never have officers in school or maybe something different than that. >> well just from my experience in santa cruz county probation, what we saw was a direct school to prison pipeline. a link higher numbers of young people being brought into the detention center. and when we analyzed the data, we were saying it was coming specifically from one high school that had a resource officer in there. that had a police officer.

and so what we did was we gathered a bunch of stake holders as well as community based organizations to figure out how we could eliminate and provide an alternative. and what we ended up having was community-based organization who were trained in conflict mediation, who were trained in reconciliation, be a part of this outreach program where the officer could then use them as an alternative versus sending people directly into the system. as well as in chicago, we trained the gathering for justice trained seniors in nonviolence as well as the staff. that led to the high school being 150 days without violence. and so i think we could look at alternatives. i certainly feel that i think another thing that we do as a nation is that we begin to

criminalize children's behavior things that we may have done as children, i think are now seen as a crime. and so i think we need to reevaluate policies and what criminal behavior actually is versus childhood behavior. and so, i think that resource officers need a lot more training and youth development and so i think that if we're not going to remove the resources officers immediately, i think there's an opportunity to provide more training and resources to them so they can make a better judgment when referring young people either to a detention center or detention alternative. >> go ahead. >> i was going to ask mr. st. jermaine for his views on that. and you were talking about, you know, recruiting folks and having that interaction. so i'd be curious on your views about school resource officers. >> you know -- similar to ms.

flores, it's an issue for me. you know, as a young man who spent years in a juvenile justice system, i spent 3 1/2 years in the juvenile justice system and currently work with young people incarcerated. it's my life passion purpose, what i'm going to do for the rest of my life. i interact with young people who are in the system who are at risk on a regular basis. and, again, having police officers in the school. if the objective is to actually help and the system is not going to punish those officers for not arresting and punishing these kids, then yes it can work. again, these officers are human beings like any of us. right? if we doing the job and our higher ups and our commanding officers are telling us we need to do this and do that.

we need to seem tough on crime something we're big on in this nation. then having police officers in the schools in schools is not going to work. but if we change the way the system operates and what we incentivize, what we give, then sure. who really changed my mind. i was questioning myself saying was that real? does this officer really just cared about me and ask me if i'm all right, did i eat, what's going on? i think things like that can really help to -- whether we want to have officers in schools, or not. again, if that's not the goal. if the goal is not to prevent and help, then having them in the school i think to me actually deteriorating the situation and makes it worse. >> that's really helpful, thank you. >> thank you very much. seddrick alexander.

>> pretty much asked a question i had in mind but you know sitting here listening to both, ms. perez and mr. st. jermaine. and to your point, to both of you all's point, our goal was not to arrest kids or put them in jail, but was to help them and build relationships with them and get to know their families and so forth. but, over the last 30 plus years or so many schools across this country have become adjusted to having school officers in their schools. and what would be helpful for me in terms of what you're recommending because i would like to be able to defend what you're saying and what you're requesting. because a question is not going to get asked so much by police

as much as it may get asked by educators who will say to you is that for the past 30-something years, i feel safer in the school with police officers here because depending on where you are in the country my school is not that safe. kids are coming into the school with guns and knives and drugs and gang violence and et cetera et cetera. correct? so because that will probably -- it'll be interesting to note that you probably would experience some pushback from those in education who would say, hey, i want those police officers in my schools so that i can feel safe. how do we -- how do you help me help us respond to that? mr. st. jermaine? >> i'll make this really quick. you know if -- and there are young people who are carrying

weapons and other contrabands into school. and, again i know that the focus today is police and community relations, but this conversation is much bigger. which i won't get into it but you know, sometimes we need to ask ourselves where young people are getting these guns and weapons. but if there are young people bringing weapons and contraband into the schools, sure enough, if you have an officer there, their job is to make sure the school as a whole is safe. right? >> whatever needs to happen if a young person is bringing a weapon needs to happen. public safety is number one, is paramount. however, all i'm saying is the objectives should not be to punish kids. if it happens it happens. and we're going to take care of it whether that young person being arrested or whatever needs to happen it happens on premises and we handle it the

appropriate way. but if the officers are not being incentivized to actually find thingsindividuals, then i think educators in the communities won't mind that. you know, i have a son. and he means everything to me in this world. and i'll protect him by any means necessary. and i want him to be safe. and if he's in a school where other individuals are bringing weapons, sure, i wanted something to be done about that. however, it's the way we're doing it. again, we're not doing it to harm the entire school. we're not doing it to all of a sudden look at every young individual as a criminal, as they carry weapons. one particular young person bringing a weapon, we deal with that young individual and we do whatever we need to do to make sure it doesn't happen again. so, i guess what i'm saying is sure, we needed indicators to be safe and we want to make sure our children are safe. if there's a young person that's

bringing in weapons and putting the school in danger then we'll handle it accordingly. however, if the objective is not to actually punish them, then it won't be such a huge issue. i don't know if i answered your question. >> that was great. >> i -- you just reminded me of being a young person in school and that wasn't too long ago, but also we were founded -- the founding for justice was found after a young 5-year-old was handcuffed and the charges were that she was unruelyly in the classroom. those are the situations we think of. now f that was a case in caucasian schools, then maybe we would have a different conversation. usually there are not many resource officers in white schools. i want to think of this through a racial jult lens. the fact that when i went to school, i was sent to the principal's office or i was --

or a psychologist was contacted. i want to remind ourselves there were other ways in which we did things than we've done now. and criminalizing and funneling young black and brown people into the prison system based on their interactions with resource officers in our schools with the policies we have in place right now. >> thank you very much. we're running low on time, so i'd like to encourage both task force members and panelists to keep their questions and answers as concise as possible. we have brittany followed by connie rice. >> thank you. thank you for being here and the work you're doing and the work across the countries. my question is along the same vein. i'll make it brief. i'm looking for very specific information, mr. perez, as your experience as a former probation officer. as an educator, i actually agree with you because there is this issue both of the actions of a school resource officer but in a

lot of ways merely the presence of a school resource officer internalized. i have an officer at my school. why isn't there an officer across town in the rich part of town. i appreciate you bringing up that point in that racial justice lens. so, then if that is a potential solution, what is the kind of alternative training that you provide educateors to be able to do the kind of risk assessment, et cetera, that you did as an officer to ensure that the presence of an officer might not be needed but we can help support those students who might be making some of the young choices? >> i certainly feel that there needs to be more. i think training is also provided to -- to educators. i was with an educator for 17 years. he was a teacher. and i think because he also came

from a similar community a lot of young people came from, they remember able to relate to him. resources available at your finger tips to know what's available, who can come into your school. in watsonville where a lot of these young people were being referred to the system from, we were able to have a community-based organization there present every single day and made available to educators as well as the administration as an alternative. they were able to provide a conflict. they would walk around the campus, making sure that young people were safe because what you said earlier is like, you know, we have resource officers to protect -- protect the school from certain crimes, but not all young people are criminals. and so we are able to incorporate those types of programs as well as, like i said where they were peer

educators, peer conflict resolution and nonviolence warriors within schools that were then able to talk down their peers. so peer education as well as contracting community-based organizations that know how to deal with with that kip of conflict in school. and more training and services made available to educators. >> thank you. >> thank you. connie rice followed by shawn smoot. >> thank you. all three of you. moving and salient testimony. real quick. you've given us a lot of suggestions. could you prioritize them for me? i mean everything from training resources, cops who are fluent in the community who are there, race studies. you've given us a real range of -- could you just the top two, each of you? if we had to limit it.

>> it needs to be beyond our politician forces. it needs to take place systematic throughout our society. i know when i was in my early 20s as a privileged white kid from the suburbs and assume that because i grew up in a family that supported civil rights struggles that i was anti-racist. and i realize how much i am a child of white privilege. that ongoing kind of training is incredibly -- changes world views and is incredibly important for all of us. so, i hope that that can become systematic throughout our police forces. >> thank you. real quick. a re-ee valuevaluation of current training and just on the system i would think system

accountability. i would say to incentivize quality police work. not just how many people you arrest and how many pechltrps you bring in. that for me would be number one. number two would be teaching some police officers, many of them in the streets doing the work, the history of this nation and what causes some of the things that -- that have to go into these communities in the first place. again, no disrespect, but many of these officers patrolling the streets, my close friend who was a police officer, worked very closely with them. i work very closely with them also. they do not understand why they have to do some of the things that they do. gerngs i don't blame them. i don't fault them. they never had to learn it.

they grew up in a different environment and now they're just following a system that asks them for a specific issue or numbers or whatever. again, training and helping officers to understand the communities they're working in and some of the things that took place in society that caused them to have to be there in the first place. and i think that would really help. those are the main two for me. >> our final question will come from shawn smoot. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would echo my colleagues' appreciation for the panel today. i very much appreciated you, ms. perez bringing up sports and outreach programs. that's work unions have, frankly, done a lot on their own. both in terms of getting their -- the police officer members to participate and also in funding. and often we do that partnering with churches and other community groups.

and so my question for the panel, if you could give us a specific recommendation. we know there are programs that have been hugely successful. i think one is a hat tip to los angeles, the watts football program. but that's a -- the city of los angeles has clearly made that a budgetary priority. and so what can we do working together? and i guess specifically, what recommendation would you put forward to facilitate the reprioritizing of those types of programs in terms of getting state and local bujz to really make those a priority? >> well, we're talking in a sense of working with state legislators on budget issues or at the federal level. there are untapped opportunities for alliances and coalitions

between police forces ministerial associations unions, teachers on and on and on, to really come together around a common agenda that this is what we need in our community and i don't -- i'm not even aware. i'm sure it exists but i'm not aware of anywhere where police officers and clergy for example, are going to the state ledge tour and saying, this is a compelling need. i think in many cases that would have a significant impact. city councils as well and so forth. we need to create -- we don't have to recreate the wheel. he with just have to use the networks we already have in existence. >> thank you very much. i want to thank the panel. this was excellent. please, let's thank them. in order for us to stay on tame we won't take a break between panels. bear with us as we seat the next

panel, which will be a law enforcement panel. thank you. i would like to call the hearing to offer and we now have our law enforcement panel. and i'm glad to welcome all of our witnesses here this morning. and we're going to start with richard berry a president of the international association of chiefs of police. chief berry. >> thank you professor robinson. mr. davis, commissioner ramsey members of the task force thank you for inviting me to testify today. my name is richard berry and i'm the president of the international association of chiefs of police, commonly referred to as the iacp and i've been a can cop for over 37 years. due to the hard work and dedication of the law enforcement profession, many

communities throughout this nation have witnessed a remarkable decline in the rate of crime. america in 2015 is a far safer place than america in 1985. in fact violent crime in the united states is at its lowest level since 1978. now, we know in order to be truly effective, police agencies cannot operate alone. we must have the active support and assistance of our communities. unfortunately, resource shortages have made consistent sustained community policing efforts difficult or impossible in many agencies. police departments continue to take on more responsibilities with less manpower and funding. we're not just responding to crime, violence and disruption but also to homeland security concerns cyber crime, human trafficking and exponential increase of noncriminal crisis calls like responding to mental health issues and drug overdoses.

these responsibilities take time and responsibilities away from patrol and community policing duties. the more we're tasked with the harder it is. therefore, it is incumbent upon all of us to work together to identify solutions and approaches that can be implemented not just by the law enforcement community, but by the criminal justice system and the nation as a bhoem whole. to that end, the iacp has taken action including holding a national policy summit on community police relations. representatives from the ncaa the aclu, the leadership of conference on civil rights lawyers committee on civil rights as well as various representatives of local civil rights communities groups joined us at the iacp to sit down and look at how together we can begin to mold a culture of trust and solutions. i'm pleased to announce the iacp is releasing a report, a copy of

that summit report today and it will be available. have extra copies. i hope you'll use it as a blueprint. now, there are three overarching conceptual police relations defined during that summit. that is communication, partnership and trust. now, unfortunately, my allotted time will not permit to go into all those identified strategies but you have the report and i hope you will use it. we know that this presidential task force was assembled to finding sustainable community/policing relations but the movement forward cannot stop there. this is not just a community policing issue. that is why for more than 20 years the iacp has been -- has called for a national policy commission on the entire criminal justice system so we can make across-the-board improvements. and i've heard you loud and

clear all the previous presenters. my only question is, where you been? we've been calling for it for a long time. now, to be successful in your commission, as panel members, you need truth and facts, not mooits, lies and inyouu en ininewen dough. to put things into perspective the average number of arrests per year are about 12.5 million, which equates to over 34,000 a day. these are arrests ranging from abusive children to serial killers. of the millions of arrests made each year this doesn't include citizen contacts. these are arrests, fatal encounters with law enforcement in arrest situations occur at a rate far below a rate of 0005%. while any death or injury is regrettable, these incidents are rare. especially when you consider

many of the individuals arrested are under the influence of drugs and alcohol, have anger management issues, suffer from mental illness or simply choose to be combative. at same time we must of course the threats faced by police are real. 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 126 officers were killed in the line of duty, including 59 that were murdered by gunfire or assault. this is higher than u.s. combat casualties in afghanistan. this simply cannot be tolerated. the current smear campaigns aimed at law enforcement are unnecessarily placing our officers' lives in jeopardy while they perform the already dangerous task of reducing crime and violence in our communities. i grew up in high school in the

'70s. the current public climate is reminiscent of the 1970s as our troops are withdrawing from vietnam. the brave men and women who served honorably were villainized for wearing the uniform of this country and upholding the oath they took. the treatment of our veterans then was wrong just like the current treatment of our brave law enforcement officers is wrong now. i encourage you to truly examine the facts, the risks and challenges of policing in an armed society. we are like none other in the world. police use your collective wisdom expertise and influence to help us make this country safer. thank you for convening this session. i look forward to answering questions. most importantly, thanks for taking this forward. don't let it stop here.

we need to look at the entire criminal justice system. thank you very much. >> thank you, president berry. let's turn to chuck canterberry. >> >> thank you for allowing us to be here to share with you perspective of rank and file officers who serve in harm's way each and every day in the streets of our communities. it is their views that i'm going to offer today. all of us here know that there has been an erosion in trust and respect between law enforcement officers and the communities they protect. particularly in communities of color. similarly, the law enforcement officers are growing more distrustful of the citizens in many communities because of increased violence that targets law enforcement officers. a rise in firearm fatalities and assaults especially ambush

attacks and flat out assassinations have forced officers to become very weary when responding to any call for service. that is why i have called on the president and congress to amend the federal hate crime law to include police officers. enough is enough. it is imperative we bridge the gulf of trust and respect between the police and their communities and work together to bridge the gap. and i urge this task force to take a broad, holistic approach. the issues of trust and legitimacy is not just a law enforcement problem. it's a systematic issue throughout society. the lack of trust and respect may be most obvious in law enforcement because our officers are the most visible form of government but the jish pervasive. schools are failing parents and students alike, eroding confidence in the idea that with a good education anything is

possible. instead, schools process our children without guaranteeing them an ed occasion elected officials cannot make good on their promises and basic social services wither on the vine as funds dry up and demand for service overwhelms the ability of government to provide it. poverty, both the poverty of income and the poverty of true opportunity is the common denominator. as more and more of our citizens especially our young people and people of color no longer trust that the american dream is within their reach. for a young man of color to finish high school without a basic education because of social promotion, is he robbed of that opportunity and that's a robbery that law enforcement cannot respond to. his world view is likely shaped by an american -- was likely not shaped by an american civics class but by social immediate, yeah saturated with a subculture that celebrates anger toward authority, disrespect for women

and willingness to use force to ensure they are not disrespected especially in front of their peers which often triggers a swift escalation of even the most routine police encounter or any other authoritative figures. i don't need to remind anyone here these problems have been building for generations. and a three-month study is not going to provide all the solutions. this endeavor will have to be permanent work in progress and we need to commit ourselves to it. the fof wants to be part of a changing culture of policing but we as a society and a nation also have a responsibility to make changes. we must first reject any notion that the law enforcement culture is intrinsically racist. it is wrong to think a criminal because of their color daisht color of his skin is a criminal but it's equally wrong to think a man is racist because of the color of his uniform. enough is enough. we must also reject the task of legitimatization of violence and law breaking as a weapon of

social change. no grand jury decision or government action should result in local leaders ee effected officials openly justifying or not burning of businesses, looting. when these criminal acts are not swiftly condemned as wrong but instead met with a shoulder shrug or explained away as completely reasonable release for pent-up frustrations we invite an increase in violence, which leads to events like the assassination of new york police officers ramos and liu. the killer of these two officers believe outrage as a perceived failure of justice was reason enough to end their lives and then his own. enough is enough. the trust gap and lack of respect for our government and its institutions led an

due process. law enforcement officers acknowledge that individual officers will have their actions scrutinized. we welcome that. sadly, the media and public figures often engage in a rush to judgment and make statements about an event without all the relevant facts. this will sometimes inflame public passions and exacerbate the community situation. especially in cases where the initial opinions often turned out to be mistaken. this undermines trust and does damage to the concept of due process. it is critical to demonstrate our faith in and sxhiment to due process.

it must not be effected by negative media, coverage, threats of criminal activity mass violence or any other retribution by the public. law enforcement officers as public employees have the right to due process as anyone else in our nation does. we need to make that clear. especially if law enforcement managers persist in efforts to create a database of these certified officers. the fop -- in the past and must continue to do so unless due process laws for all police officers are uniform throughout the nation. perhaps this effort will bolster our later efforts to improve the process for police officers. again, thank you for allowing us to be here today. our written testimony will be submitted and we stand for any questions. thank you. >> thank you, sir. our next witness is richard staneck, a past president of major county sheriffs association and a member of the executive committee and sergeant in arms for the national sheriffs association.

welcome. >> thank you, ms. robinson, commissioner ramsey, task for members. i'm the sheriff in hennepin county, minnesota, and beginning my 32nd year of policing 24 years with minneapolis police and eight years currently as a sheriff of hennepin county. it's my distinct honor to be here on behalf of these two organizations, national sheriff's association and major county sheriff's association. i want to thank you for holding this listening session. as is currently there's no currently serving sheriff on the task force we feel that today's forum plays a critical role in providing the public with the insights, the experiences and the perspectives from our nation's sheriffs. sheriffs are unique in a number of ways. first, we're the only democratically elected law enforcement leaders in the country. most directly accountable to the public they serve. sheriffs are the only law enforcement officers in the nation that provide the full line of criminal justice

services, including corrections to the operation of our jails. lastly sheriffs hold a wide variety of policing and public safety responsibilities due to the diversion geographic and demographic makeup of our counties. sheriffs across this great country represent remote rural areas as well as the more densely populated urban areas. these experiences allow us to provide a unique set of observations regarding the key issues identified by this task force. we should begin with your mission from the president. to identify best practices and make recommendations on how policing practices can promote effective crime reduction while building public trust. while this has become a topic of national concern, police community relationships are not managed at the national level. police community relationships are local. the bond between law enforcement and the public varies greatly across this country, agency by agency. from the context my own experience in hennepin county, a

very diverse county with 1.2 million residents, 425,000 are noncaucasian. our population is growing and demographics are changing every day. we have over 40,000, nearly 100,000 somali and others who live in hennepin county. we have 37 separate law enforcement agencies from osewa, minnesota, with 6 police officers to minneapolis with 800 officers. each with their own set of relationships with their respective communities. in some, the dynamics between law enforcement and community are excellent. unfortunately, in other communities the dynamicics are not as positive and work needs to be done to restore relationships of decades of deep distrust. before that warranty sweep, before that traffic stop, before that drug search warrant and before the 911 call. we should develop, maintain and invest in these relationships at the local level and focus on

specific goals and basic elements on both sides of the equation. the first is well trained deputies and police officers. they have to be reflective of the community we serve, who are properly equipped compensated, supported, who are accountable for their actions, who respect the privacy and protect civil liberties of all residents and who understand their role is to be one of public service. the second is engage community leaders who actively participate in -- who promote in assistance of community members about police practices and our -- who partner with us in their business, schools, neighborhoods, place of worship to build strong vibrant and resilient communities. the third, our chief law enforcement officers who are accountable to the residents directly through their own elections or indirectly through elected mayors or officials of

city council members. who facilitate driblgt participation via commissions or advisory groups, boards or roundtable who is listen for insight and direction from the community about policing policies and practices that best serve their residents. nor wanting to break through the status quo by engaging diverse communities through recruiting and targeted outreach to community leaders. your recommendations we believe should support and further these goals with the most important goal being to build communities of trust through agencies that are reflective of the communities we serve. again, as a local example over the past eight years hennepin county has approved our diversity through actively recruiting minorities and military veterans, as most agencies have, but we still have a long ways to go. sheriffs believe measuring diversity in the workforce is only one way to quantify progress. the other measurement is community participation in the development of our practices and our policies.

it also community involvement in ad an advisory capacity to our agency. a specific example would be allowing women of muslim faith to we're hejabs in hennepin county jail. to better reflect the expectations of our community members. to strengthen law enforcement community relations we must better highlight the challenges and the dangs for our officers and deputies. 121 police officers guide in the line of duty in 2014. 47 were killed by gunfire. over 50,000 of our officers are assaulted every single year. our jobs are filled with uncertainty, violence and hostility. training and incident review go a long way in establishing best practice and preparedness. however, in real life, things can change in a heart beat. things that even the best training can't account for. for most americans the officer on patrol is the most direct and visible point of contact to the

entire criminal justice system. but law enforcement is only one part of that system. we enforce the laws. we don't write them and we don't define sentencing guidelines. police/community relations in every town or every city could be improved with a better understanding of the criminal justice system and through a greater public awareness of the constitutionally limited role of police in a democratic society. when we act to enforce our law it's for public safety in service to the residents. fulfilling our oath of office means more than respect. we protect the privacy and the civil liberties of all residents. in addition to their safety. for me and for the sheriffs across this great country, this is how we define the role of policing in a democratic society. for us this is what it means to serve and to protect. the nation's sheriffs also offer several recommendations, to madame chair and commissioner ramsey and members and raise additional concerns that need to be addressed in the context of 21st century policing.

the first is national initiatives from the department of justice through the community-oriented policing services program designed to strengthen police/community bonds should be analyzed, it should be enhanced, they should be cross-applied to other areas experiencing similar problems. these efforts should focus on greater participation by our citizens and reserve police officer programs or organizations like the national citizens police academy association and advocating resident interaction to gain a more personal stake in community safety. we suggest moreau teen interaction between schools and police. particularly in distressed areas. local school districts could coordinate educational visits to police departments, foster interest in the law enforcement at a much earlier age. the sheriffs recommend a national educational effort to increase public awareness of the law enforcement profession and the criminal justice system. understanding the experiences and the variety of criminality across the country to help shed light on the current status of relations in our respective communities.

we want residents to understand why law enforcement officers use certain equipment or certain tactics. to ask the public to comply with certain procedures. these tools and tactics do serve a purpose, to protect the officer and enhance the safety of the public, including the safety of the individuals undergoing arrest or detention. understanding this could help mitigate confrontation, reduce confusion and escalation on both part of the officer and the public. finally, sheriffs emphasize the need for stable and consistent funding for programs and initiatives designed to assist state and local law enforcement. for example, the mentally ill reduction act, the burn justice memorial grants, community-oriented policing services, the state criminal alien program, changes from year to year in these programs can disrupt our workforce hiring our community initiatives, our training, our equipment, our technology, our administrative efficiency and counseling services which are all necessary

to ensure a modern and effective police force. miss robinson i know i've taken more time than previously allowed. i appreciate that. but in closing, i want to say this. sheriffs are essential partners in any effort to increase the trust and the confidence of the american people in our criminal justice system. our sheriffs hope that forums like this will lead to open discussions between law enforcement leaders community members, opinion leaders, including policymakers right here in washington, d.c. i want to thank you for the opportunity to testify today and i, like my colleagues here on the panel, welcome your questions. thank you. >> thank you, sheriff staneck. our final witness on this panel is andrew peralta, national president of the national latino peace officers association. sir? >> thank you. my name is andrew peralta, also a lieutenant with the las vegas metropolitan police department. i'm sure you know we're no

stranger to the process with the department of justice and the cops office, so i've actually had the privilege of being involved in a lot of is that change, so thank you. i'm also the national president with the national latino peace officers association founded in 1974. i want to point out that we believe the vast majority of cops that hire on today hire on for good reason good intentions, want to do good things in the community president but the reason we exist as a national organization is because of these very issues we're looking although talking about today. they were recognized back in 1972 by two of our founders in california. they founded this organization to try and help tackle some of these issues in the hispanic communities back in their day. also i want to thank you the opportunity to allow me to speak in front of you. i'm going to go ahead and go right into the main topics you sent us. role of police in a democratic society.

we believe that the police departments and agencies, we exist because the public wants us to exist. they want us there to help protect them. this relationship must be protected through transparency and mutual trust. policing communities and the communities they serve need to see each other as partners in the 21st century, not enemies. police departments must match the demographic of the community. we know there are challenges in the african and hispanic communities that we serve. we need to change that we believe in the sanitity of life and we believe that needs to be imbedded in policy and training with the emphasis in the use of force policies to be progressive and with an emphasis on de-escalation. we believe associations such as ours that have been around for many, many years trying to tackle these issues could be useful especially with strained budgets and limited resources

available to the department. we have our own and we could help. hiring a diverse workforce. there must be a commitment from the top of every law enforcement agency to mirror the community at large. maintaining racially balanced recruitment teams. whether you're hiring or not. those officers could be useful in representing the local demographics and encouraging those young juveniles to become police officers themselves. and be active in the schools, even if we're not actually hiring. you know locally we went four years without hiring. we're no stranger to that. but some of those teams could still be used. and there must be a commitment today. each position hired for 20 to 30 years. time can't wait. every officer hired locks up another position that is not going to be available toill that

person retires. there has to be a commitment today to help change that. the area of procedural justice. we like citizen review boards. we believe those are important for engaging minority communities so they feel their voices heard and concerns are met. civilians could be an integral part of police departments help hold us accountable and get message out to the public that we're doing the job right. transparency during critical incidences is important. building better media relations up front before an incident has occurred we believe is paramount paramount. letting them know how you operate. that transparency will help minimize confrontation or wrong information or racially dividing information being put out during a critical incident. of course sanctions for departments found guilty using

race in effecting arrests. they require all departments to have a written policy against racial profiling. we believe those are very important. racial reconciliation. one of the tactics we use is reaching out through faith-based communities. we know in our hispanic communities in the west, they don't trust cops. they came from an environment where the cops are the ones hurting them, so they don't want to come to them and it's led to a lot of victimization in those communities. they won't call us. but we know they go to church. we know they trust their pasters and their priests, so on and so forth. so, having a series of retreats with the faith-based communities to reach out to that segment that doesn't trust us to help bridge that gap, we believe, are very important. police must avoid the us/then mentality and reach out to the community to mend old wounds. lastly, must be a greater attention placed on how

discretion is applied in the community. officers have a lot of discretion in that trust. and that discretion must be applied in an ethical and fair manner. this can be accomplished through training. community engagement dialogue. citizens academies whether it be hispanic african-american, being visible in the community during charitable events, christmas and otherwise, police minority resource teams that are employed in different large agencies across the united states and are locally, to work with the minority communities so they can see that hey, we do have officers out there that are like us and that are concerned for our needs. police minority recruitment teams compose of citizens and officers this gives a community a hand in supporting its own best interest. improving police and youth relations.

positive interaction, we believe, needs to happen at a younger age. it can't wait. those individuals in our elementary schools are our citizens tomorrow that are going to be bringing up the same issues if we don't work now. we believe early positive contact is essential. working with high school homeless populations providing food and supplies. we know the youth homeless population is growing. that might be a way to reach out to them as well. youth leadership academies. and the young adults need to be able to see police as a helpful resource to them and we believe that's one of the ways. police leadership development. the point of our highest liability rests with our day one rookie officer. leadership must start at the lowest level. it can't wait until you're a sergeant lieutenant, sheriff. they need that understanding, that leadership up front before they promote because they're at that point of contact as we saw

in ferguson, that could be the ignition source to something we don't want to see. a lot more leadership up front whether it's in the academy, maybe early requirements in the initial development of a young officer. training such as fair and impartial policing has helped us in las vegas. and across the united states. dr. lori friedl is one of those. her course is excellent. we recommend her. make this training a requirement prior to promotions for anyone in the leadership position. or at least to be completed with a one-year promotion. in closing we believe that minority associations such as ours, we've been out there for years. we've been trying to tackle these issues for a long long time. and we've been waiting for an opportunity like this so we like to definitely thank you. we will continue to participate in the necessary studies of research provided by the doj and

this task force. we're here to help. we encourage the government not to let go of principles of community-oriented policing and to find the communities to bring back or continue the necessary programs of research to keep this going. for those community members watching us today, we are you. as cops. as a minority officer i live in your community. i worry about crime and i worry about residing in a safe neighborhood, same as you. and i wonder how we'll be in 15 years for my grandchildren. with that said, you know, our commitment will be unwavering when it comes to being an active participant to communities of color. we're here to help communitywidz, governmentwise. >> thanks to all the witnesses. we'll start our questioning now. we'll start with brian stevenson. >> let me just thank all of you for your testimony and for being

here. i want to particularly thank mr. peralta for specific representations and sheriff staneck. just have two questions. sheriff berry i would be interested in, because you work with national organizations. if you've heard, either from other panel lists or earlier today, specific relgss that have been initiated by police chief who is are doing innovative work in their departments that you think would be positive things for this task force to recommend, specifically on this question of building community trust, building better relationships between departments and the community, and then the second question is to any of you if you could identify innovative leadership in communities that you've worked in or seen or heard about that you would like to draw attention to and bring to our attention, i would be interested in hearing about places where you think people have done some creative things, specifically on this question of building trust

between police and communities. i share your concerns about the broader issues. because we're not talking about them, i don't want you to feel like you're not being heard. these questions have gun access, sentencing, drug policy r very big issues that law enforcement have to bear the brunt of but you are heard on those issues. i'm interested in any specific recommendations you've heard that you would like to endorse either from your co-panelists or that you've heard earlier today. >> first and foremost, i think the most important thing that we've heard from day one is collaborative communication in our neighborhoods. we have got to work -- and i think most of my associations have been doing community outreach for years. we've run the leagues in many places. we do christmas drives to help feed the people in our neighborhoods. we do clothes drives, shop with a cop programs. we've been doing that type of outreach for a long time. but a lot of police departments don't have the resources or the

ability to do that. and the collaborative agreements with the churches and the community groups is essential. and i think rank and file police officers, when community-oriented policing became a buzz word early in my career in the '80s it was fine for community-orienting policing as long as i didn't get out of my car, you know? and then it started to where i better get out of my car. we need to be able too get back out of our cars. but with current staffing levels being what they are overtime compensation being cut back, it's very difficult for officers to do anything proactive in a neighborhood. we are -- we have become a reactive police force. it's sad but since the major cuts in law enforcement we estimate we're down close to 100,000 police officers since the late '90s. that's caused a huge void of people getting out and doing what we're supposed to do. as far as innovation, i heard

about some of the school resource information, which shocks me because my state is a small southern state and we've had school resource officers in every middle school and high school in the entire state for the last eight or ten years. and many of those programs run summer programs for at-risk children in cooperation with the schools. those have proved to be very effective in our communities. mr. stevenson, for specifics, i would again take you back to this policy manual. i didn't get into them because i knew timewise we were pressed. i'm trying to make up for some of the lost ground. and i think the issues are so in-depth, they need that. also my written testimony that's been committed contains a great deal of detail on those ideas. some of the training -- lori friedl was mentioned she's a professor at the university of south florida in tampa and she's done a great deal of training in the state of florida on bias.

she does great -- a great job. the other thing that was mentioned earlier there are a lot of location says that have great relationships with the clergy. a perfect example i would tell you about is orange county, florida. sheriff demming has done a great job to bring that community together to work on issues. again, they do after-school programs they do a lot of things -- programs for at-risk youths. there's a lot of great examples out there. at the end of the day, as chuck just mentioned, the funding and dollars for training. the state of florida right now currently authorizes $67 per officer, per year for training. $67. now, that's up from $40 two years ago. that's what we're up against ladies and gentlemen. those are real numbers. that's what's going on all across the country. the improvement in the economy that has happened across the

nation has not made it to the local levels yet. a lot of the tax revenues are not there property values have not come back. there are still agencies struggling. i say to you, what kind of training can you do for $63 or $67 per employee? pretty tough. >> did either of our other two witnesses wanted to weigh in on this question? >> sure. like i was saying, that's part of what -- where we come in to try to fill that niche. we have chapters from alaska all the way to florida. we do provide annual training. it's a week-long annual conference we do that does provide police training. noble does that, alcoa does that. we have our own budgets. that's something we can reach out to because we know police departments are strained. they really are. the dues we collect throughout the country can be useful in that. as far as reaching out to faith-based community, talking about specifics or things that

happen in certain areas, we work closely with one of our county commissioners. we think it's very important to try to engage with the local governmentment as well. it takes everyone. not just police or communities. have you to reach out to the local government. commissioner puts a summit together and gives us officers a chance to come out and speak to these young african-american and hispanic students to try to pique their interest. we talk about what it's like to be an officer to get them interested in being an officer. it's interesting in a lot of the communities even now, the recent one i was teaching at we had four groups of 40 to 50 students come through. maybe six to eight out of all of them had any kind of interest in being an officer. we know we're falling short in reaching out to our juveniles. so, we think we need to continue those efforts. we have opened our doors as well.

we're for equality. you know, we're proud to say that and -- we've opened our door to african-american, whites, a lot of our boards are mixed. you can't fight inequality if you're prejudice yourself. that has to be mentioned. >> thank you. rich, anything quickly you want to add? >> i'm going to try the second question. when you're ready. >> okay. >> perfect. well, let me say this. i'm going to talk a little about these community adviseory boards because i think this is important. about trust and partnership, so how do you build that trust and partnership? i'll go back to the best example i know which is back in my own state, which my deputies raise their right hand swear to uphold the constitution of the united states, swear to uphold the constitution of the state of minnesota and the laws of the great state of minimum pin. those are the three things that govern the actions and duties

and responsibilities of our deputies. we go one step further in our agency and that's a community advisory board. it's made up of 38 members of the community itself. the faith community business community, educators, the and joe and jane average citizen. i could just say, you know, you're just a sounding board, thank you for your advice and guidance, but we don't do that. we ask them what they think. we talk about our policies before they're put in place we talk about our funding. i use their input. it isn't just an advisory capacity like in some organizations but we truly use this community advisory board. that's building this partnership. these partnerships don't come overnight. building communities of trust don't just begin and stop and start and start again, it's something you build over years and years and years. many community advisory members have served since i first got sworn in as sheriff in 2006.

some come back. some move on to a different business or move outside of our county, but at the end of the day, they want to come back. they like having a part and a vested interest in a stake in the community at large. we empower them to be able to do so. i think that's raet really an important concept as you continue your work and your recommendations back to the president that you highlight those things. thank you. >> thank you. moving on. connie rice and tracey mears following her. >> thank you, gentleman. i want to make sure i read it right and i don't think i did because three of you sounded extremely combative. and i can understand why you felt attacked but i'm wondering

if you disagree with william bratton, chief charlie beck, the current chief of lapd, when both of them testified that the future was not in handcuffs and that police would have to change their mindset and their outlook if they were going to bond with these communities of color, do you disagree with that? >> i'll start with that. the answer is no. again, that's why i go back to the iacp for over 20 years has been trying to get a national commission on criminal justice to look at the entire system. we have been wanting this for a long time. we could not get anybody to sponsor it for years. we couldn't find anybody in congress that would take it forward. so, the answer is, we've seen this train coming for a while and we've been trying to be up front. and we have not been able to get people to actually take action. so the answer is, we -- i

absolutely agree that the entire system needs to be looked at. unfortunately, law enforcement keeps taking the brunt of it and, you know, again sentencing and all those type of things we don't control those. and the other thing i found interesting before with the schools and school resource officers and making arrests. our hands in a lot of states have been tied because of the fear of juvenile crime and guns in schools. we don't have a choice. when i started in this business in 1977, you had some discretion on cases. any more, that discretion is gone because if you don't make an arrest and that person offends and hurts somebody, you're done. your career is done. your agency is done. you are -- so it takes a systemwide adjustment to make this thing better. >> but isn't it true sir that that first contact with law enforcement is how most of our kids get funneled into this

criminal justice system. so, there's a lot of discretion that you hold. i mean i guess i'm -- i'm asking if you can agree with that or not because that first contact with the criminal justice system, it comes from the conscious decision of an officer to place that child into that system. zild answer that, it depends. look at the domestic violence laws across the country now. discretion for an officer is gone. i had a friend of mine whose 17-year-old son got arrested because him and his 18-year-old brother got in a fight. under the domestic violence laws now, if you don't make an arrest and something bad happens, so officers are erroring on the side of protecting themselves and protecting the agency. i'm not saying it's right. i'm just telling you, there are always unintended consequences. unfortunately, anything to do with schools anymore if you don't make an arrest and something bad happens, it's over.

and i don't think the officers have the discretion they once had. that's my personal opinion. but i agree that initial contact is crucial. it au also depends on how that initial contact happens. if it's a voluntary encounter or if you're called to a situation and you fall into one of those mandatory reporting areas, you don't have much discretion. >> beck and bratton have both said that they had an obligation to change the mind set of the traditional police officer. how would you interpret that? do you disagree or agree that the mind set of the officers is an area that needs to be focused on along with all these others that you've listed? >> well while i'm up i'll hit on that one too, and then i'll turn the microphone over. i believe in the nobility of policing. and that is, the constitution of

values that go with it. and the fairness and justice that are part of it. do i think we need to do a better job with that training? yes, ma'am, i will not argue with you on that one bit. we have to. there are great programs out there. we do have to change the mind set. along that same time though we have to have the public's help. accepting violence and that just becomes the norm is unacceptable to me, too. there are shared responsibilities. and i think law enforcement will step up and do our part and the public needs to do their part, too, and have shared responsibility. >> thank you. >> i think there's another segment of the population that we don't lay the blame at the feet of, but police officers are used in this country by politicians to handle problems. going into areas of high krirnlgs areas of high vandalism. the police department are the -- are the public servants responsible for making us

contacts. i heard earlier about in incentivizing for arrests. nobody -- quotas for arrests should be illegal. police officers ought to have discretion. in st. louis county the fop took a position years ago that they needed to consolidate those police departments because you couldn't go from one borough to the next without getting two traffic tickets because they govern on the money that's provided by the police departments. we should not ever be used for revenue source and police officers don't want to be used as a revenue source. they need to renew the amount of discretion. video cameras, body cameras are now causing officers to effect an arrest because somebody else will second guess every decision he makes. why didn't you put that person in jail? you had a clear violation. why didn't you put him in jail? i thought that my discussion with that young man was fruitful.

believe he understood what he did was wrong. and i also believe by allowing that subject to go away that i've left him with a good impression. well, that good impression is going to cost you three days off for not enforcing the law. so, there has has to be -- >> discussion. >> i agree with the chief that officers must have their discretion returned. but that starts with the politicians who pass the law. we have zero toll lens in our high schools. i live in an area where children go hunt and fish before school. and if in the back of their pickup truck they leave an empty shotgun shell case, that's a penalty. with that discretion, it has to be taught there's no reprisal for a police officer who thaz that discussion. >> got it. >> we have a limited number of minutes left for questioning in this segment. and six members were or five

members who still have questions to ask. so thank you for your answers there. and let me turn to tracy meares and then jose lopez will follow. >> thank you for your testimony. i'm going to make that as pointed adds i can. i want to frame it with the point that professor tyler brought up this morning that crime has gone don substantially over the last 30 years yet public trust has remained the same with the substantial gap between the levels of trust that whites and nonwhites hold in police. it seems like there is agreement among all three panels that we need to improve the levels of trust that police have with communities. and the question is how to get there. so i want to echo what connie rice said and what bryan stephenson said in seeking specific recommendations on how to do that. you were clear on that you wanted it, less clear about how except for the chief.

so specificsly for chief canterbury, i would reich to hear your brief comments about your views on training with respect to procedural justice, in addition to bias. but what about procedural justice. even if you don't believe you have a choice in arrest you all have been inconsistent just now about whether you think there's discretion or not. you do have a choice about how to treat people. and i think the question is how we ensure that there's better treatment. >> i think the chief addressed that in his testimony. there are over 12 million arrests a year and millions of police contacts. and the vast majority of those go without any incident. training is obviously a key. you heard the chief talk about the statistic. training is the fist thing that got cut after 2008 in every police department in the country, training budgets were sliced.

our officers are in-service for 40 hours a year in my state and many of them are having a hard time getting them off the street to do that. so any kind of training that will benefit the officers. and you've got to remember the police officers out there don't make the rules in these police departments and most of the times we're not included in the rule making. i think as part of the clab tiff effort we have to be involved to. rank and file has to be involved. and the issue of discretion being returned to the street officer is essential. >> let me answer. one of the things that is in our report too, it's about getting everybody involved in law enforcement. you need to know what we do. this's no mystery to what we do and unfortunately people get their ideas from tf own the movies. that's not what cops do. any of the programs where we get peemd involved the at-risk programs, we need the regular people that work 8:00 to 5:00

if you could carve out some hours, come to a citizen academy, see what we do, see the training understand it and be part of the advisory committees. those things are an incredible tool. unfortunately, one of the things that's happened, we're all victims of it. many of us putting in more hours for less money. at the end of the day do you want to go to the police department and listen for a couple more hours. unfortunately they don't. we hope that you as a team will come back with some great ideas that we can steal. we don't think we know it all. i've always believed in hire people smarter than you. whatever you have, please use the report and we'll take your ideas and we'll run with them, i guarantee you that. >> thank you. jose lopez. >> and i think, yeah my question, i think we've gone down this road a little bit but u want to come back to it. when i think about our prison system and kind of look at the

overwhelming numbers of people in prison and who have gone to prison over the last three and four decades and the fact that those majority of the people in prison look like myself and look like brittany. it makes me think about kind of the role of law enforcement. and there are folks -- and i think we heard it on the last panel, this notion or this idea that law enforcement needs to serve as a function or does serve as a function to maintain racialized social control. and so i just want to hear from the panel kind of how you take that notion this idea that law enforcement's function is to maintain racialized social control. >> well, i'll start on that. this is the furthest thing from the truth. the fact is when you're a cop and you get the call you don't get the pick who the victim is you don't get to pick who the

suspect is. when you take a report -- in "dragnet" they used to say the facts, ma'am just the fact. that's how cops operate. are the numbers disproportional? yes. those are facts. the cops didn't create those. that's why i said to you in my testimony, i encourage you to dig into the real facts and the risks and get those facts and come up with a plan. again, we don't pick and choose or cases. they come to us. and to think that there's any kind of institutional anything for putting people in prison is absolutely false. and the disproportionality i agree with, it needs tore examined. but the disproportional nalty in this nation is embarrassing as a nation. >> brittany packnett.

>> thank you all for your testimony. i kind of have a two-part question and the first part is pretty basic because like attorney rice, i think i might have misunderstanding something and i'm looking for some clarity. so the first three of you, your testimony seemed to suggest that the burden of responsibility is equal on parts of the responsibility -- on parts of the police and the community. and in my community i think the community could disagree given that police officers swear an oath, are licensed to carry a gun, can take life et cetera. so i want to know if you agree with this idea that the burden of responsibility is actually heavier on law enforcement before i ask my second question. >> i think there may be a perception that it but it shouldn't be. we all have the same responsibility towards society. i don't think that police officers should be held to any kind of a higher standard. but we should take the lead.

and we should work with the communities to help build that trust. i mean we're not -- none of us have sat up here and said that we think that there's not a trust issue. we all know there is. but it's both ways. and until we get into communities and work together and talk about it, i mean one of the worst things in the police department is you never ever -- you can be accused of a lot of things but you don't ever want to be accused of arresting somebody for a racial -- because of their race. which issen an accusation that's made a lot. i don't know a police officer out there that wants to arrest somebody because of color, because it's just not what we do. it's just like the chief said, we get the call, we respond. i think there is a disproportionate number 0 people of color in prison and i think the whole core issue goes back again to poverty. i hate to say it. but those who have, have good

lawyers and those that don't, don't. and i think that's a problem. i think the disparity in sentencing is a problem in the country and it's something that needs to be adjusted. but that's not a law enforcement issue. we don't make recommendations on sentencing. most of the time we have no say on any of that in law enforcement. so i don't think we have any more responsibility than anybody else. >> so let me quickly ask my second question. i don't honestly think that you and i would agree on that point because i'm the child of a pastor and to who much is given much is required right. the idea that law enforcement is operating with more hower and authority there is a higher level of accountability. but you did say something that i think we have common ground on in that law enforcement should take the lead. so my question kind of mirrors traci's in that i'm wondering what are some specific suggestions, specifically from any of you honestly around not just kind of program mattic an one on one solutions, but

systemic solutions? >> i'll take a stab at that one. i have a big of long-time trainer in the academies as a sergeant and now as a lieutenant. one of the things that we like to look at is when budgets are cut, what are the things left behind that hand story training is going to be revolve around the high liability, less infrequent stuff. defensive tactics. when your training is about shooting handcuffing within the physical part and less emphasis on the verbal part, it can create an imbalance. we can't ignore the training. a lot of it is mandatory. we have a 40-hour training requirement. but. without support and funds, i can't get the officer to other things. i have to kor the high liability things first. but i think we start in the academies recognize the 'em imbalance. some of the stuff on discretion, fair and partial policing you

may not get until in-service later, like i was pointing out. the highest point, the ignition point is with the new officer out on the street having the confrontation and how he applies that discretion. he's going to grab what he knows. and if he hasn't been trained in that yet, he's going to go right to something he does know, handcuffing, defensive tactics or maybe shooting. so we believe those communication skills we need to swing the pendulum back, we need to balance that out as much as there's training in physical, there needs to be training in the verbal communication arena as well to help change mind-set. >> we're going to have to really condense the remaining questions. so about one minute to two minutes on each. sean smoot and then wrapping up with the chief. sean, quickly. >> one of the things that we've heard over the course of the day -- first of all, thank you

for testifying. i appreciate what you and your members do for us every day. there arecy lot of people in the community that you don't understand what the police do how they do it and why they do it the way they do. and so my question for you, to any of you is if you could identify one department, one jurisdiction, one program that you're aware of that does it right, that has -- makes that explanation to the public in the right way. >> i'm going to say las vegas. you know my sheriff was very pra active. we saw that. we saw the shooting happening and weren't quite sure what to do about it. reaching out to resources like the doj i think are vital. to come in and help reset the scale to zero so to speak and get you back on the right road.

we've done very well with it. i think, you know, also it's also habit in our area of commands if there is a shooting our command staff comes out, the captain comes out and walks the neighborhood knocks on other doors and asks those neighbors that were there while that shooting went on if they're okay, do they need anything. those kinds of grass roots things that we do. you know, we set up hoping, thinking we're going to see some riots in vegas and it didn't happen. and i can only think that that was because of the community involvement that that department has. >> does anybody else want to weigh in on the panel? >> i'll once again say the iacp, we jumped on and put this summit together. we didn't ask anybody for funding. we did it ourselves because we knew it was an important topic. we needed to get it out to our members so they could start building the trust and alliances. >> is there a curriculum in the

materials, chief? >> this is the initial draft, there are specific recommendations and we plan on follow-up to come up with the programs. we turned this document around pretty quickly. i have to say probably a lot quicker than a federal publication. we did it pretty quick. >> we're familiar with being on timelines and turning things about quickly. >> chief we'll have to wrap up. >> thank you for appearing here. i just have a question. post-9/11 it seems that a lot of the federal funding that we were receiving shifted from community oriented policing funding to a homeland security more of a defense type investigative funding to stop terrorism. i understand the perception of that and most of that has proven true, that a lot of the terrorism events are found at the local level. but in your opinion do you feel that transitioning back to that pre-9/11 philosophy of training

more of the community oriented approaches and getting officers out of the car and talking would be a good tactic to deploy? >> i move approval. >> i don't know that i necessarily say agree with that. i don't think we can go back to pre-9/11. over 90% of law enforcement in this country is done by state and locals. so i think that the preventive training that we've received on how to identify potential threats is important on the jtf task forces and those things. but yes we've been pushing the justice department for more grant money and cops money. we were huge supporters of the '94 crime bill that put -- that president clinton pushed forward with 100,000 police officers in the street. we supported it more than anybody else that i know and we continue to support that. and part of our biggest problem now, our staffing levels. it's hard to go back to community policing when, for instance, in baltimore, you're down 265 officer new york city

down 6,000 officers from their high period. so it's very difficult when staff -- >> re-evaluating that balance again. >> well, thank you all. this has been a terrific panel. thank each of you. i know you have very busy schedules. [ applause ] >> despite the fact that we've run over we will be resuming right at 1:30. and before we adjourn, ron davis has a brief announcement. >> just to let the audience know and the people watching on the webcast that the task force will be breaking for lunch right now. but any deliberations about the testimony or the recommendation to the president will be suspended until after lunch. i'll see you back at 1:30. thank you. thank you, commissioner. we're now going to move into the public comment period. there have been cards that have been passed an around. people can put their names on.

as we told you in the beginning we wanted this process to be as open as possible. we're also taking comments from online. we'll kind of go back and forth take someone from the audience and then someone online. at the sake of time i'm going to start the announcements. you don't have to come to the mike. we'll come to you with the microphone. let me apologize ahead of time if i don't pronounce your name correctly. so first person i'm assuming is going to be kemone freeman. an if i could say before you start, this won't be a question and answer session.

we're look farg recommendation of comments. the task force will not be responding as far as answering questions. so thank you. >> go ahead. >> yes. >> i've been here all day and it seems to me, aside from brother mary k.j. right here i want the thank him for not being pc thank you sir. that's what we need. except for his testimony, i feel as if we've been in a parallel universe. do we know why we're here? do we know why the president convened this task force? it wasn't for us to talk about how good of a job our police are doing or how much the crime rate has gone down or how we could do this better. we're here because it's been open season on the murders of unarmed citizens. that's why we're here. or should i say we're here because there's been an outrage against that.

this has been going on the kind of policing against people of color in the country for centuries. this has come to a head because we're under the tutelage or the jurisdiction of a black president and a black attorney general and it has not changed. so in lieu of that it has come to a head because the system seems to be unwilling or incapable of putting a leash on killer cops. they're seen as if that no one is actually in charge of the police. at the sake of upsect a large organization of armed white men it seems even in new york, as we have seen, that there is a great ocean of divide between the community, the so-called leadership of the police officers and the police officers themselves. this is unacceptable. how do we do this? we need community control of police. mary k.j. suggested that in the instance of unarmed citizen being killed by the police that they kick up upstairs to the

fbi. we've seen the fbi and their role has been questionable historically. what we need is community control over the police. the citizenry are basically unaware of their rights in dealing with police officers. we don't have civic education in that regard. and police officers take advantage of that. they're trained to take advantage of that. and there's two types of policing. policing for people of color and there's policing for those who are not. and unfortunately a lot of people who are not of color do not have a point of reference. they have not been verbally insulted by police officers. they have not been thrown to the ground, not had their car searched our their belongings thrown to the ground during a traffic stop. 90% of the arrests in washington, d.c. is nonviolent. we need to understand this. broken windows is acting like a domestic om occupy us police force.

their comfort super seeds the quality of life for people of color. and we're here because no one has put a leash on killer cops. i have five recommendations. they are, here we go. number one, have a legitimate citizen review board with the power to fire a police officer for misconduct. many city do not have these powers. they're paper tigers and we need to give them power. we should require significant percentage of police that work in a community to actually live in that community. this has been tried before and found to be unconstitutional to require people to live in designated areas. this can simply be overcome by challenging the rules in court. the mayor must live in the city he or she represents. the council must live in the area or the city he or she represents. why not the police. have an automatic expulsion

clause. four, every year in every city in this country millions of dollars are awarded in civil lawsuits to settle cases of police misconduct. all of this money comes out of the city's budget. it should be shared with the budget of the police department and the salary of the officer in question. i assure you, this will immediately alter the behavior of rogue cops. finally, five, engage community input into the city negotiations with the all powerful police unions for any future contracts and adds transparency to this procedure. therefore we need to get rid of the grand jury system because it is not working. we have not seen one indictment in years with all of these cases and this is why we're here and this is why the president convened this task force to put a leash on rogue cops. thank you. >> thank you, mr. freeman. i'm going to turn next to a comment from online. >> right here, ron.

>> thank you. >> we've been collecting throughout the day comments that have been produced online from the website and twitter messages. the first comment that i would like to read was submitted online. there is no doubt that all agencies have had issues of bias, even discrimination. and these issues do need to be addressed. even though it appears that law enforcement is being painted with a broad push and i don't believe this is fair. we must work together to solve this problem. >> thank you. dr. li young. they'll bring a microphone to you, coming from your left. you can stay where you're at dr. young. they'll give you a mike. thank you. >> good afternoon. thank you for your presentation.

but i ask more testimony since early this morning, of course before 8:00. and bring in index card request again in writing. hopefully we have enough time so you can digest what i'm trying to say. i've been here all day. but the problem when i heard is the policing. i really heard about social justice. now police secure people by gun, gunshot, by brutality, by punch. police have all kind of the misconduct. you know, involved foreclosure eviction. they have send people to -- dragging people on the ground, poor people, punching, get

people's blood. that's one of the reasons i oppose that there's penalty because they draw people's blood involuntarily by the patient or their family. they don't even get approval. but they draw it by big tubes. so you think you can imagine they can have a plot or murder to victimize somebody they don't like. -- mental institution because they are political prisoners or some kind of -- or somebody that's anti-wars or somebody who is opposed the political view of somebody who is supposed to have political budgets. so all kind of things that the police will go to city hall, go to the council meeting.

law enforcement, they can share it the security and things. the people who want to testify, and abduct them out of the hearing room not allow them to listen. not even testify. just listen to other people's comments. now one more reason is a lot of people who support a politician is who want to have the benefit. so always have -- proposal. that's why i always -- that's why i'm against those especially everything about -- i'm from montgomery county maryland. supposed to be famous for education, famous for intelligence, famous for posterity. but that's not a case when you consider the government function and the police. >> 30 seconds dr. young. >> how much time? >> 30 seconds, ma'am >> all together? >> yes. >> how much all together you give to me.

>> two minutes. >> i know you give the others 15 minutes or more. but you didn't tell me how much money i can have. >> yes, ma'am 30 more seconds, dr. young. >> how much total time you give to me. >> every speaker will have two minutes, dr. young. >> every speaker have two minute? there's nothing in your proposal, your testimony -- the president's task force on 21st century policy -- >> dr. young are you finished with your comments? >> no. >> please continue. >> i just started. and you don't just according to this, 21st century policing. you're not even talking about equality of speaking time.

>> dro young we're out of time pep we can continue afterward. i'll give you personally another five minutes and i'll listen to it and take your written testimony. >> excuse me we're in public hearings. >> you have 30 second, dr. young. >> thank you. we have 1% 99% inequality. there's the problem with our system. so important thing is that when

i think of black you got to see how they suffer. but nobody tell how they suffer. everybody is thinking about how do we get money from federal. that's people's money. we got work to be done. we got to promote fairness, freedom, justice, piece humanity productivity, general public, budget, opposed so-called so-called. so just by that they take away all of my computers, all my internet connection my internet

yahoo! account. >> dr. young that is time. we're going to proceed to the next person. there are people behind you who would like to speak as well. >> i want you to be sure to investigate this. >> next up will be dr. young we have people behind you that want to speak. thank you. >> i will give a written statement with six attachments. >> outstanding. >> please be sure to -- >> i'll make sure that the task force get a copy. yes, ma'am. thank you. ms. comfort. thank you, ma'am. >> thank you for having me. i never thought i would be in this situation. 26 years old, gunned down in montgomery county february 19th

2011 by a police officer. said he told him to stop like 30 times in 30 seconds. i don't know how that is possible. my problem is accountability. if this police officer's knows he would be prosecuted for a crime, god forbid, if you and i kill somebody, you know the consequence. but can't hide behind the badge and murder our children. i've been here all day listening to the police telling those they want their officers home. so do we. we want our children home. okay? we send them to school, not to come back in the body bags. there's good cop and bad cop and i want to take this time to

thank chief ramsey. i was a vendor for 25 years in the district of columbia right there by the white house. that's how i send all of my children through college. you did a fantastic job. you stood up for the bad cops that were taking bribes. two of them were convicted under your watch. so i thank you for that. there's a lot of good cops out there, too, like sergeant scott of montgomery county. he did a fantastic job. but officers like christopher jordan who murdered my son should be held accountable. and there's a whole lot of women out there, black african-american children that have been slaughtered by the people that are supposed to

protect them. please help us look into this. my son did not deserve to die on the street like a dog in the hands of somebody that was supposed to help him. yes, i'm mad about that. he was a law abiding citizen. and it was captured on a video. thirteen eyewitnesss, video, state attorney tell me somebody mistakenly deleted that video. how do you justify that? that was a murder, not a justifiable homicide. help us to keep our streets safe for our children. they are not supposed to be slaughtering them, they are supposed to be protecting them. thank you so very much. >> thank you. >> online. >> well, before i go online, i'm going to do a little more online and then more in peern. people have been sitting here patiently so we apologize for

that. let me go to mr. george fisher -- i'm sorry about that, faulkner. >> thank you. i have one small but very important comment for the commission regarding any recommendations of forthcoming data collection efforts regarding deadly force on a national scale. and that is that fatalities make up as little as half of the number of officer-involved shootings that actually occur. and the distinction between a fatal and nonfatal incident is not the intent of the officer, per se. as many on the commission know, police are trained, with very few exceptions, trained to aim for center mass. whether or not the suspect dies could be affected by a number of factors such as the proximity of a hospital or the trans location of the bullet wound.

therefore if we want to understand the phenomenon of deadly force, police use of deadly force, we should stop referring only to deaths in custody and expand our call to collect all uses of deadly force, all officer-involved shooting incidents on a national scale, including missed incidents, injurious and deadly force incidents. thank you. >> i'm going to pass the mic to chip stewart who is going to be next. before james stewart goes, i have this card. i just want to remind the audience that all your comments are actually being captured. they will be presented to the task force in a written format as well. if you don't have an opportunity to talk today or not talking go online and provide comments we would enkurnl you to go online and provide comments as well. james stewart. >> thank you very much. and thanks to the commission. you're talking about building trust and legitimacy with the community. the one issue that stands out, has been brought up a couple of

times today, is when a critical incident occurs where you have a shooting of typically a suspect and that suspect is unarmed. that suspect is african-american or latino. and one of the issues that the community has complained about the most that i've seen is the fact is that when the police disclose any information, they say, well, there's an ongoing investigation so we can't release any more information other than the name of the person that was shot. and they move on. now, there's a criminal prosecution that can occur subsequent to that, but i want to direct your attention to something i consider more important because it is the changing of a police department. and that is that the internal investigation or the independent investigation of that shooting, to see whether it is not, whether it is justifiable or nonjustifiable, that is a legal finding.

that should be left up to the prosecutor and the coroner. what the police department ought to take a look at is whether it's in compliance or out of compliance with the dental policies, training, procedures and best practices and tactical judgments. that has not been the case by most police departments. they merely look at the situation. they say at the moment the trigger was pulled, it was justifiable. and what i suggest is an independent investigation to show what the precursor incidents were that brought the officer into contact with the individual, the circumstances that happened and whether there was any moments to deescalate or alter the tactics that occurred. that can only be done by separate and independent investigation. i want to direct your attention to two locations. >> thirty seconds. >> let me just say, the use of force review board can make that finding or an independent investigator can come in and make that finding. it doesn't have to be a special prosecutor.

the role model is las vegas police department which actually has four civilians who are voting members of the use of force board and three sworn officers. i don't know of any other department in the united states that offers that and that's why i'm bringing that up. but in order to make an informed judgment, they have to have an independent investigation. thank you very much. >> thank you. go to online. >> okay. we have a twitter message from national council of churches. mass incarceration is the civil rights issue of the 21st century. >> one more. >> next one, we recommend body cameras for police and federal funding for communities that cannot afford them. >> next in the audience, i have a dr. stephanie meyers. thank you, doctor. >> thank you very much for this excellent session.

all of the panelists have really been outstanding. i represent black women for positive change, which includes a volunteer network of women and men of all faiths and gender and race. and we really believe that in addition to the operational issues that have been so beautifully presented today, we must step back a little bit and address the entire culture we're dealing with. our overarching theme is that we really need to change the culture of violence in america and really throughout the world. but we know that america is the standard bearer for so many issues. so we urge the task force to address some of these larger issues. we urge you to call on hollywood and the media to stop promoting violence in film and in social media and look at different ways to communicate. we call on the task force to find ways to give youth a greater force. through the use of technology, social media, film, we know that our young people have incredible

things to offer and to engage with us. we must find a way to do that more effectively because they are the ones in the body bags so often. we must find a way to make them part of the solution. we also propose that you support national week of nonviolence. there have been two years of this already supported by 12 governors, 50 mayors. and that the task force consider calling on the nation to have a national week of nonviolence, next october 2015, and call on neighborhoods, churches, schools, police departments to sit down and talk about conflict resolution, nonviolence, building partnerships, building trust, and all the issues that you have addressed today. and finally, in terms of best practices, our organization is partnering with pittsburgh police department and we would like to recommend that you take a look at what they are doing. the police chief is having public conversations in public housing communities, at