backgrounds? it's an enormous challenge. one of the reasons it is an enormous challenge is significant impediments to accompli accomplish. we operate under a strict civil service. they develop rules, policiepoli. they are developed regionally and governed by state sta statute. we have the early past of last century to ensure a fairness in selection and hire the best individual based upon, i think what we all understand is not a very accurate assessment tool. that is a check off, fill in the blank or check the box written examination, a pen and paper examination, which in many cases do not stand-up to detailed scrutiny as to whether or not they are accurately measuring the skill sets needed to become

a police officer in this case. so, if language and background and life experience do not fall under that protected class environment which gets you into the court system happened with race and gender, how, then, are we going to move these, a different type of individuals into the selection process? that's number one. the second part of that is, right now, having looked at, we have completed 250 public safety studies around the country in 600,000 population and 800,000 population. we have seen a lot of different situations. we are screening out of the applicant pool people that, in my opinion, should be police officers because we abide by somewhat antiquated set of screening instruments. i'll give an example. one, we are doing credit reporting. some police departments do a credit report on a 21-year-old individual who is applying to be

a police officer. if they are below a certain score, they are knocked out of consideration. no one has shown a correlation between the ability to have a higher credit score and the ability to do police work succe successfully. we screen out people with minor drug use. that's changed a little bit, but we are pushing away people with minor experiences with maureen, in particular and preventing them from becoming police officers. people who have minor encounters with the police. minor arrest records as juveniles or young adults. they are screened out of the process. if we get to that, going back to the initial discussion about we want people with broader life experiences, aren't those, in many cases the kind of people we want to be part of the police force because they do represent the community they are going to be policing? so, we are, in many cases effectively taking out of the pool of candidates those very

people that could contribute dramatically to the success of the police department and improve the relationship between the police and the community bauds they come from the inner city community. they are the ambassadors you are looking for. they are the people that might be recommended by the local pastor or local basketball coach or teacher, yet they get screened out of the process. another area that we have dramatically screened out, good candidates, in my opinion is the educational requirement that we imposed on a lot of police agencies around the country. some departments have a four-year college requirement. many police departments have a 60 college credit requirement. 60 college credits in any subject matter whatsoever. could be sociology. it could be phys-ed.

no requirement to related to the job you are trying to get. we force them away from consideration because they don't have 60 credits. again, i have actually done, working for the city, done a lot of research in this. no one has ever demonstrated a correlation between 60 college credits in any subject matter and being a successful police officer. even worse, nobody has identified what a successful police officer is. they make a lot of arrests? they avoid suits at litigation? do they write a lot of tickets? no one identify what had is success as a police officer. do they stay out of trouble? are they aggressive. do they have complaints or staying on the sidelines? again, we are using this educational requirement to eliminate solid candidates. if you role it up to the issues identified in the task force report about wanting to bring in

people more diverse than we are screening out, you get a sense of how difficult this challenge is going to be. that challenge gets worse when you start thinking about promotional examinations within the department. within the agency, there's been an awful lot of litigation and the obvious one is the case in new haven that involved promotional examinations that took into account racial outcomes in the candidate list. the supreme court decision makes that process that's been used successfully in the past to change the racial make up of police departments and fire departments and makes that illegal. another area we have screened people out is residency requirements. this is one of those areas that has pros and cons. the prois, of course, that if you have a residency requirement for people to apply for the job, you are giving greater opportunities to the people in the community that the police

officers are going to police. however, when you do that, you are reducing the candidate pool because you are prohibiting people that don't live in the city from applying for the job. again, that works against the recommendations in a task force report. so, this change to occur is to occur properly is going to require significant different ways to approach this. it's going to involve necessity, changes in civil rule whether it's local or state. it's going to involve an active marketing campaign. one that i would refer you to is the cops office hiring in the spirit of service program identified years ago. i use that as a human resources commissioner to do significant recruiting effort in a city that was under court order, by the way. we used some of the guidelines in the hss brochures and

programs. we were able to attract a different candidate to the job. the way the hiring of the service program described is we want to hire people who want to be police officers because of service, not for adventure. that gets us to the guardian issue. i actually like to use the word to describe police officer is peace keeper. i think that is a better way to describe than guardian, a peace keeper between people who are going to be worn with each other if the police don't interact. one area i think we have the best chance to be successful in and increase diversity in agencies is on female police officers. as they talked about, there's research that shows women bring a different skill set, in many cases, a better skill set to being a police officer. they are a protected class, of course. there are, i believe, a lot of

women who if we did a better job marketing and reaching out to them would enter the police force, the way that happened with the military. some of my career paths, i had a lot of work with the coast guard. they have been enormously successful in attracting women to the coast guard both as officers and enlisted. that could be an area that we need to take a look at. this requires money. if you are going to do a marketing campaign, you have to hire marketing people. you can't just ask somebody in hr who has never done this before to come up with a marketing campaign that includes television, radio, print advertisement and now social media. it's a cost that if we are going to implement this particular recommendation and if we are going to do it successfully is not only going to face bureaucratic hurdles, but also fiscal hurdles as well. that is a dollar cost. i think that it's a tremendous

opportunity for us to reach out to females to become police officers. i had the opportunity when i first started in law enforcement to work with some of the first female police officers in patrol in miami-dade county. they sent these poor young ladies out in a-line skirts, heels, working in liberty city. that changed, eventually. we are not allowed to become police sergeants, they could only be policewomen two. it shows there's significant opportunities to change the direction of police departments by hiring more females. one quick other area i want to talk about is implementation of a lot of thing that is are in the task force report and i want to talk about body cameras. in many places, implementation of body cameras is a mandatorily gauchable subject for labor. right now, we are seeing some

cities, cincinnati, for example, sent a cease and desist letter to the city to stop implementing body cameras until they staw th impact. boston negotiated a short term program that 100 police officers were going to go into the body camera test. they were going to be paid $500 extra for completing the test. not a single police officer volunteered to be part of the test as of two days ago. if we are going to continue with a lot of these changes, even things like mandatory vest wearing, maybe mandatoriy lilyi gauc negotiable in some states. we are going to have to think about what the implications are, both financially, from a bureaucratic standpoint and also from a labor relations standpoint. my best recommendation is when you get involved in talking

internally about doing these things, you need to have the city attorney involved in the discussion at the beginning. inevitably, these are going to end up as collective bargaining or litigation or both. i would like to close by reading you a couple paragraphs from a report you heard about earlier. we have cited deep hostility between police in minority communities because of the orders we survey. practically every survey, abusive relationships between the police and community members are a source of grievance and tension. it is wrong to define the problem as hostility to the police. in many ways, the police officer symbolizes deeper problems. the police officer is a symbol of law and the entire system of law enforcement and criminal justice. as such, they become the tangible target for shortcomings

throughout the system, against a semiline justice in lower courts, widespread disparities and sentences, antiquated correction alpha silties. to whom, for example, the option of bail means jail. the police officer in the city is a symbol of increasingly bitter social debate over law enforcement over one side who are disturbed by sharp rises in the black lives movement and so forth and crime and violence. they exerted pressure on the police for tougher law enforcement. another group enflamed tends toward defiance and what it regards as order maintenance at the expense of justice. the police officers of a society in which minorities are alienated. at the same time, police responsibilities have grown as institutions of social control have lost much of their authority. schools, because so many are segregated, bold and inferior,

religion which is relevant to those who lost faith and hope. career aspirations for where they are lacking. the family because bonds stress it is no longer supportive and as a result, the officer who must fill the institutional vacuums is resented for his or her involvement. yet, precisely because the police officer similymbolizes s much, they take every step to allow grievances to flow and release tension and turmoil. that is a quote from the president's commission on riots, the commission report written 50 years ago. i have had this book since you and i were in college because he and i went to school several blocks away from springfield avenue that was burned to the ground in the new york riots. this, if you are in law

enforcement or if you are watching this an c-span, you need to get a copy of this book and read it. look at the pictures that are incredibly disturbing, heart breaking. it talks about negroes and ghettos. it has the sense of problems they were facing 50 years ago. you can get this on ebay for five bucks, a yusd copy. take the time to do that. it puts everything we are talking about today into perspective in how badly we have done, as a country, with the numerous commission reports, the numerous studies and we are still facing the same issues today, 50 years later. there are recommendations in here that mirror the president's task force report. almost word for word, the similar language we still haven't implemented. thank you. [ applause ] >> wow. they did teach you something at

school. >> i think you get a hard dose of reality when you come to the city administrators and ask for stuff. i appreciate your comments. we are a little over time. i'm not going to let you get away without a few questions. do we have questions for them? >> good afternoon. thank you for your comments. i'm a lieu ten nance with the texas police department and serving in the d.c. area. just a couple comments, really, probably more projected at dr. baldwin and mayor james. talk about 21st century policing and task force recommendations. we have been involved and talk to the national league of cities. many chiefs of police have really talked about trying to

adopt a 21st century police and going through the police department. since we have been having the conversations, i have learned dramatically that policing is different across this country and how people operate and how they view serving the public. a lot of police chiefs are or some police chiefs are having drawback from dealing with city management to the point where they probably have written a paper on their own and given it to their city management. if you could comment as people are watching and kind of paying attention, why is it important for city leaders, particularly those of city management or mayors and city government to really take a look at this task force report and adopt it as we continue to see policing evolve in the future. >> okay. good question and from the city management side, that touches on

what i just talked about. the city manager and the mayor as well, has to have the overall well being of the entire city at heart. that's our responsibilities. and to the extent that we go through the report, we fully understand what the tenants and the recommendation of the report say. then, we can also integrate and what i have found we can integrate a lot of those tenants into other aspects of running the city as well. procedural justice is just as critical in the courts. it's just as critical for the cold compliance people. it's just as critical for any other area of the city that comes into contact with citizens. so, the recommendations, while the task force is focused on

21st century policing, the recommendations help us to have just a better government, generally. and so, i think every city manager should be very familiar. people ask me quite often about my transition from policing to city management and the difficulties there. i tell them that it hasn't been difficult at all. i think any community minded police chief going into city management will find that the opportunities are greater with more departments. to implement recommendations like this for the benefit of the city so i can't agree more that it's critical that the city managers do. >> from my perspective, because if i'm not aware of what's going on in policing, i'm going to be at a very critical disadvantage when day after day, people walk

up to me and say what are you doing about the homicides in this city. duh, i don't know is not an acceptable answer. it is also important, particularly considering the structure of our city, and our police department, for to be able to have a conversation with the police chief who is responsible for setting the tactics and strategy of the police department without being oblivious to the options. if we don't have direct city control, we at least need to know what the options are and have discussions about that. the report you are talking about, the update on it, a quote i like is the commissioners warn of the consequences if nothing changed. i think we have seen the ominous consequences and we are going to continue to see them if nothing

changes. it is important to be able to be in a political position between the citizenry and the police department in order to talk about options, what's available in order to make the lives of the policemen safer and better and the lives of the citizens safer and better. you have to know your stuff. that's why it's important to be up to date. >> as a former police chief and public safety director and city manager, i would see this as risk management. that's really what this is about. if we don't change things dramatically, it's going to cost the cities even more, not just in human loss, but financial loss as well. that's one thing the managers understand is risk management and the importance to reduce exposur exposures. >> this is about a cost benefit and a political environment, which is almost an oxy moron.

my question is, what is it that you need in terms of analysis to take the argument that it's worth the investment to do the reform or is there anything that can do that? leonard brought up things about there's structural obstacles that have been around for 55 to 100 years and prevent a lot of these things to happen. what is it that you need? >> well, i think that you are right, there are obstacles and i think we are experiencing some of those right now when we talk about who is going to replace the command staff in three, four, five years when they retire and how do you do that? the policy certainly is not going to shepard that in. there's going to be that replacement and there has to be a change. what do you have to see? you have to see something that says we did this and therefore that. that's hard to do. but, we do know, we do know that

if we make some adjustments internally, that we are going to get better outcomes on certain things. for example, one of the things that joe wanted was more flow between gangs and who else was it, joe? [ inaudible ] >> exactly. so that the two areas or the areas of the police department were sharing information between the two, which then made it easier for nova to do its job. i think, if we can look at things that restructure not necessarily having to put new people in, i think that's critical, but with the people we have, restructure it so it's not aqua quasi military department. you have sections here and departments there and they don't talk to each other. that doesn't work anymore. information is the currency of

everything right now. that's true in policing as well, i would bet. >> i guess i would add to that, one concern that i have and i have heard it mentioned, the term mentioned here, police culture. while there's a lot of talk about police reform, i'm not seeing a lot of really detailed research based information on how to actually change the police culture without making the police feel like they are being picked on. so, i think it would be helpful to have some significant research and some tta on -- on what changing the police culture entails and how to do that in a logical, methodical way that's not offensive, but inform police officers. i think that would go a long way

in helping them to understand who they are and that a lot of, we talked about this 50-year-old report, a lot of what police officers do today are relics from 50 to 100 years ago. they do it and don't understand why. this focus on culture will help us understand why it is we do what we do and help us understand how to get beyond it. >> the police culture issue is a barrier to inclusion. it's easier to recruit somebody than it is to retain them. you can get them in there with promises of glory and get to wear a uniform and do great policing. when you get there, if the culture is such that you don't feel welcome and you are an outsider and you are somehow different than the others, then you don't stay lodng. plus the reality is if you are really good and you have an opportunity after a few years, somebody is going to come up and snatch you up, make you a major or something.

oh, i'm sorry. or, a police chief in a smaller town or something. you get opportunities. because there's not the critical mass and the pipeline is not full. culture is everything. it is, even when i was in the marine corps, the culture in the military police company was different. it was really where are the good guys? everybody else is a suspect. when we went out and ate, we ate together. we drank together, when we did picnics, we got together as a group. it's the culture. it is excludeing the people that need to be a part of it. >> can i add, there's a scarcity of research in the field. you know, one of the panelists on the prior panel mentioned police institutions traditionally have been siloed. there's an opportunity in the 21st century task force recommendations embrace the idea of working with third party

partners as partners, not somebody that is there as a gotcha and, you know, inveil a terrible thing that is going on but to collaboratively work together and figure out what works. as a field, we have a feeling about what works and what doesn't. we don't have a lot of evidence to back that up. >> there are some things that are fairly easily quantifiable. the attorney general, eric holder has a commission on officer safety and wellness. i was please zed to be invited to be part of that. they found that if all police officers wore their vests and wore their seatbelts in the one year we looked at, it would have cut deaths by half. half. just by putting your vest and seatbelt on. you can put numbers on that and say how much does it cost to buy the vests and how much to have people follow the rules. how much do you save by not only

human loss, but financial loss. >> forgive me, we have to move this on. let's thank our panelists again. as jane comes up, i'm going to say a couple things. go ahead. speaking of culture, the culture at cna is that we do not go beyond time. so, i am in violation of the culture. i'm going to give jane her 20 minutes and we have given her the most difficult task to sit and listen, then come up and say something in conclusion. i'm going to say a few brief words about her. you figured out we like nicknames. i'm james chip. he's james chips. i think jane should have a nickname. i think it should be first. jane, first castor. firgs female president of her

fbi class, first women of the tampa police department. she has a reputation that probably most of us know about of being a strong advocate of community policing and really working hard to sbi grate all aspects of the work she does. she, too, is a very valuable contributor to our projects. take your time and -- >> and hurry up. take your time and hurry up, jane. thank you very much. i appreciate it. i don't know, i thought this would be the best place to be instead of the opening and the closing and benefit from what everybody else had to say. now i'm not so sure that's the good place. also, as chip said before, the whole presentation was going to be framed on the beginning and the end by different aspects or different viewpoints. i don't think that's true, either. mr. gould, i could pretty much

say what he said and we could be done with it. i want to start out by talking about public perceptions of policing. as many of you know, there are a number of survey that is are done on different professions nationwide and if you look at law enforcement, public perception goes up and down. if you look at something like physicians, everybody thinks they hold them in high esteem. if a doctor kills a patient, everyone holds them in high esteem, this guy shouldn't be a doctor. if you look at law enforcement, we look like an ekg chart. it's up and down. a police officer dies in the line of duty, everybody loves us. an officer does something inappropriate and we are all the bad guys. that's something we have to live with as a profession. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what the current perception nationwide is of law enforcement. it is probably at an all-time low. let's start out with realities

of policing. we are the most visible arm of government and what we are talking about here today is, you know, the relationship between police reforms and law enforcement and the municipalities. officers have to have citizen trust in order to be effective. we basically exist to serve the community, but if the community doesn't trust what we are doing, we are powerless. in a safe community, i think we can all agree is beneficial for all. as my friend, david brown from dallas said in one of his press conferences, he said that we are asking the police to do too much these days. i think that we could all agree with that. as a nation, we can't cut budgets for education and mental illness and expect the police to deal with the fallout of that.

the answers aren't as simple as they sound. some of the thing that is have been brought up before, just hire the right people. what does that mean? it's very difficult for a number of reasons. educational background. what are you looking for? are you looki ining for a minim? people ask me, what should i major in, criminal justice? i say that's fine, but you could major in theater as well. if you came into law enforcement, you might be great as an undercover officer if you have that type of background. so, you know, it's difficult on the educational area. something else, another area that came up is testing our law enforcement. how do we test individuals to see if they are going to be successful police officers? i can tell you what we have done in the past is looked at do they have the skill to be a police officer? i like now there's more of a change to say, do they have the characteristics to be a successful police officer and then we'll give them the skill

once we bring them in as oppose zed to finding people with the right skills, bringing them in only to learn down the road that they are not, they don't have the right temperment. that's very, i think, encouraging going down the road. then task performance. what are the tasks they perform? it's difficult to make a benchmark on that. i mean, i literally have gone from changing the spotlight for a widow on midnights that thought she heard something in her backyard to high speed pursuits to investigating, you know, shooting where four or five homicides occurred. what is it? what are you looking for in that task performance? as a field trainer officer, i have had officers sitting beside me in the car that couldn't investigate their way out of a paper bag, but they had some serious street sense. you know, you could take them on a call and they could read what

was going on in the street and what was about to happen. i have taken other officers and trained them and they were incredible investigators but you didn't want them anywhere near a domestic violence incidence or somewhere where there was going to be a use of force because they would freeze up. which skill is more important and can we find the individuals with all of those skills in one? another answer, let's give all the officers cameras. that will fix it all. as we heard before, that's an incredible expense just the storage of that video footage. then, as we all know in law enforcement, we have murphy's law. it's not going to be on when it should have been on. then there's the cover up. so, that, i know, is already happened. also, what we know in law enforcement is physical violence is not pretty. the general public is not used to seeing that. this isn't the nfl.

you are not going to have the playbacks when we have ten angle that is are going to show you everything. it's the cameras moving, they are not going to get the right angle or the right shot. those things are going to happen. one of the -- also, we are learning about this. you know, the policies, public records issues that we have. then just look at the prosecution on it. i was in a city last week talking to them. they implemented body worn cameras for the entire department. they had a homicide and shipped over 100 hours of video for the state attorney's office to review. how do you deal with that as well. there's the positive and negative of the cameras. when we implemented them in a test faze in my department, the tampa police department, what i predicted is it would improve officer behavior a little bit, the public's behavior and it

would be a new reality show dpr the rest of the community. people don't really know on a day-to-day basis what we do in law enforcement. the next thing, train the police. i love that. every time something goes wrong nationwide, the answer is we need more training. so, i think if we trained 24 hours a day, seven days a week, it would never be enough training for our officers. i'll give you an example that's in litigation right now with our department. we had an officer that pulled an individual over that was in diabetic shock. there was an altercation that ensued and eventually the individualed a way. a representative called me and said in light of that, i want to pass a legislation all officers will have training in how to deal with individuals with diabetes. i said that's a great idea but the officer on scene was trained

in how to deal with diabetes. that's fine, let's train them all how to deal with diabetes z. the training we are going about how is wonderful training in my eyes. crisis intervention training, i was in a deposition and the attorney asked me, how much time do you allot for crisis intervention for officers. i said that's on an individual basis. every second every officer works, they are doing crisis intervention. by definition, that defines the job of a law enforcement officer. that's what we do. we intervene and most people's crisis. de-escalation is great training. when you first become a police officer, every insult, everything is personal to you. it takes a month to get over that. learning the art of de-escalation is very, very,

very important. i tell the kids in the great american teachings, what is the most important tool an officer has? of course it's the gun or the taser. i tell them, no, it's your mouth. it's your ability to talk yourself into or out of a situation. it's the most important tool for an officer. who is best at that? women. it's definitely great to have more women in law enforcement. i say the biggest knockdown dragout fights i was in as a police officer were caused by male police officers. everything was fine until the testosterone showed up. the next thing you know, you are on the ground. reality based training is excellent for police officers. it is excellent. as one of the panelists pointed out, you can actually measure the officers physical heart beat, heart rate. you can learn so much from reality based training for

officers but it's just as important for the citizens. we have two citizens academy's a year. the best night we have is a use of force night. we make the citizens police officers and they shoot everybody. immediately, there's no -- doesn't matter who it is, they shoot everybody. a woman did a traffic stop. she told the individual, who was a police officer acting as a bad guy, get out of the car. he said no. she told him again, he said no. i said why did you shoot him. i told him twice. i said you have to tell him three times, everybody knows that. it really is an eye opener for the citizens. they get a dose of reality and they get to understand that law enforcement isn't solving a crime in 20 minutes with commercial breaks. there's a little more to it. clearly, procedural justice was discussed and fair and impartial

policing are very, very important. in fact, should be mandatory in every law enforcement organization. as stated earlier, you can provide the training. you can change policy and procedure. if you don't get the officers to buy into that change, it's going to fail. as we say in policing, culture eats policy for breakfast. my other favorite saying about law enforcement, there's two things cops don't like, that's the way things are and change. so, changing the culture in a police department is by far the most difficult under taking that any law enforcement leader will ever be involved in. if you endeavor to institute change, you have to personally believe in it. officers are always coming up with the cause dejour. here is what we are going to do. the officers sit back and tell the younger ones, give it a

month and they'll come up with something new. you have to believe in it and you have to make sure it's implemented appropriately. a lot of good ideas die on the vine because they are not implements appropriately. another answer is develop solid community relations. who is the community? we all live in very diverse areas. who is that community? how do you define a solid relationship? it is no civil unrest? it is lowered complaints on the officers or is it a reduced crime rate. what is the matrix for that solid community relationship that you are looking at? speaking of less crime, there always has to be a measurement. there has to be some type of standard when looking at reducing crime in the area, which quite often is turned into a quota.

how many tickets do i have to write? i don't know how many you have to write. you have to enforce the traffic laws in order to reduce crashes, injuries and property damage. then the response is, how many tickets do you want me to write? [ inaudible ] >> yes. as you see, these issues are not easily defined and much less satisfactory implemented. we are aiming at a moving target. again, it's no secret, as i said before, that law enforcement is a profession is viewed negatively in our nation at this time. when i retired a lot of people, i know rodney monroe retired about the same time. oh, you are getting out right at the right time. i see it as the opposite. i see this as an opportunity. it's a difficult time for the officers on the street, this is an opportunity to change law

enforcement for the better. an opportunity that i haven't seen in my entire career at the police department. as a profession, we have got to change. you know, most people in -- most people in our communities never cared about law enforcement in the past. the majority of citizens, unless they were pulled over by a police officer never had contact with the police or victim of a crime or burglary never had contact with the police. i don't think they cared what we did or how we did it. they just wanted us to keep the bad guys away from them. they didn't want to be victims of crime. that's another positive outcome of this view, current view on law enforcement. the average citizen is going to pay more attention to the police force and get more involved, which i see as very, very positive. as i said, as a professional, we have to change and we have to

change in a number of areas. one, we have to own our past. we have to say the things we have done in the past were not right. in the '60s, the '70s and the '80s, we could pick things leading up to this current day. we have got to own that past. next, we have to communicate with the public because their perception is their reality. i'll give you an example of search warrants. when ever our organization would execute a search warrant in the neighborhood, they would come in, you know, do what they needed to do and then leave. they would never talk to the neighbors. the neighbors, god help them if they didn't own a dog and couldn't walk the dog and try to be nosey and figure out what's going on. we had the sergeants responsible for going around the neighborhood and telling everybody what they were doing. it was usually someone in the neighborhood who called about that problem house, usually drug

sales. they had called. so we are out here because they called. go around and tell them what we are doing. you know, it really does a lot for that negative perception. citations. when people get pulled over, there's not a person, not a police officer on earth that hasn't walked up to a car and the driver says you pulled me over because i'm a man, a woman, hispanic, black or white. i pulled you over because you ran a red light. their perception is i was pulled over because of their inclusion in a certain group. that, we have to deal with. that's the reality of the citizens. one of the things that the community believes is that law enforcement makes a great deal of money off citations. that's not the truth in our community. if someone pays a ticket straight out, no court, no

nothing, the city makes about $12 off that. that doesn't even come near covering any of the costs. so, i tell the officers write warnings. the warning has the same effect as a citation does. it would affect an individuals driving up to a year. we can track the warnings if they make another violation then you can write them a citation and you haven't made that negative impact with the citizen. so, doesn't make the city real happy and i'm sure the city managers are back and making a note, tell my department not to do this. another one is the collaboration with the citizens. you have to have citizen review groups. we exist to serve the community. they should be looking at what we are doing and they can take it back to their neighborhoods and say, this is a story you heard, but this is what i know. this is what the officers dids.

this is how they did it and it was appropriate. their actions were appropriate. a citizen academy, as i said, they are worth their weight in gold. you have a group of cheerleaders that go out after the academies. we started running youth academies. we get the kids that are right on the border of going down the wrong path or the right path and, you know, they come in with kind of that look that my 17-year-olds always give me. by the end of it, we always have several kids that get up and say they want to be police officers. before they had never had exposure to law enforcement. once they see it up close, they are like i can make a change in my community. they are valuable as well. then, the communication, again, i'll have to say again, i want to tell a story. it's not meant to offend firefighters. i love firefighters, but i tell this quite often especially in community meetings. everybody loves firefighters.

they can show up late, building burns down, everybody is like you tried. we are going to make you an apple pie and everything is great. police officers, when we show up and people are called, there's a disagreement between two individuals or parties and we have to decide who is right and who is wrong. we irritate half the people we deal with. go out of our way to communicate with individuals and have liaisons to different groups in your community. the african-american community, to the latino community, the gay and lesbian community because people will believe something coming from an individual that they see as themselves. i think that's very important as well. then, more transparency. this is very, very important and chief rodney monroe alluded to this. the reaction from law enforcement of, it's under investigation is not going to

fly anymore. we cannot have videos like we had the shooting out in minneapolis or near minneapolis. and not come out with a law enforcement response to that. we can't come back six months later and say the officers actions were appropriate or the officer's actions were inappropriate. we have to come out with something immediately. in this day and age of instant communication, it's incumbent of us to do that. i know it's difficult, but to be successful tharks is very important. another thing we have to do is the team effort. as one of the panelists alurided to, we are police officers, we know what the community needs. they need to be protected from rapists, robbers and murderers. it is true, but very few people are victims of rape, robbery and murder. if you ask the community what

they want to be protected from, they say i don't want anybody to take my stuff. i don't want to be a victim of auto theft or robbery. when you talk to robbery. that's not what we thought they needed. when you talk to the community and find out what they need, and it differs from neighborhood to neighborhood, you can act as a team with them in reducing those kinds of crimes in their community. the beautiful benefit of it is that the citizens don't stand back in judgment of law enforcement actions, but they become a part of the team, and they enjoy the successes, but they're also part of the failures, so it's very, very important that that team effort with the community. i used to tell the community groups that i met with, there are over 400,000 individuals in the city of tampa. there's less than 1,000 police officers, so you're going to keep crime out of your neighborhood with our help, not the other way around.

and they'll respond. the citizens will respond to that. and i can also say in my experience that most negative issues arise from a misunderstanding or lack of knowledge, which often manifests itself in fear, and that is both on law enforcement side and the community side. and a lot of the police shootings that you see can be attributed to fear on, not all, but some, can be attributed to fear. and we must work with our officers to better understand those that they serve and also do a better job of educating the citizens on the roles of law enforcement. as indicated earlier, there are approximately 18,000 police departments nationwide with very little overarching standards, very little, if any, overarching standards, however, as stated, every officer in america is judged by the negative actions of a single officer, and therein lies one of the wonders of the

21st century task force on policing, which is the playbook for the current playbook for law enforcement nationwide. and once the six pillars and 58 recommendations were published, the issue was implementation. and, as i said before, good plans and ideas die on a regular basis for lack of successful implementation, so, in response, the cops office developed a program, as you heard earlier, run by cna. it shows 15 law enforcement agency the nationwide. and the end goal is to develop a list of best practices that can be shared with all 18 thousand police agencies nationwide. now, as the saying goes, all that is old becomes new again, which was just proven in our last panel. and the reality is, 19th century principles are as valid today as

they were when they were written. the golden rule sha, which we learned in the first grade, treat others as you would want to be treated. there were things that they were all told, tenets of our organization. one was the golden rule, and that was that everyone without exception was treated with dignity and respect by our officers. the second was for them to never lose sieght of the power that ws contained within their badge. they have the right to take away someone's freedom in the most dramatic instances, their life. and to never lose sight of that power or to weld it inappropriately. and third, was when they put on their uniform, to a degree they lost their individuality. because their actions, positive or negative were reflected on

1,000 other men and women, and they better make sure it was a positive reflection. and to have empathy for those that you serve. here i tell a story about me as a young officer. i pulled over an individual. he had a tag that wasn't registered to the vehicle. it was a criminal offense, but i just wrote him a ticket, told him to take care of it. a month or two later i was in the same area, and i saw him standing outside the store. and i said how you doing? he said not so good. he said remember that ticket you wrote me? i didn't have the money to pay for it, so i lost high lmy lice then my insurance was canceled, and i was a junk man and that truck was my way of life. for this individual, it was a life-altering event for him. so it's important to be empathetic to the people that you are serving. now, in discussing police

reforms, we also need to discuss officer wellness. we have got to prepare our officers to perform well, and we also have to provide the tools to keep them safe. now this is very simplistic sounding, but it's anything but simple. we must also communicate with our officers. there's a great deal going on nationwide, and we have to keep them informed while allowing them to express their needs and concerns and their ideas. they're the ones on the street. they know what's going to work best. we also have to be mindful of our officers' mental health. the upside i always say of law enforcement is we get to see and do things nobody else gets to see and do, the down side is that we have to do things that nobody should see and do. can you imagine responding to the newtown incident? and look at the day to day

activities, the calls you can remember every second of 30 years later. we've developed a first responder retreat in tampa based on military ptsd treatments. and i have had officers that have gone through that say thank you for giving them their lives back. it really is a pro found, and our entire staff had to go through it, it's one of those things that you wouldn't believe until you've been through it. the people who have been through it had no idea the negative impact their profession has on their life. and one of the main questions today of officers is this guardian warrior. are we guardians? or are we warriors? but those aren't mutually exclusive terms. we're both. there are instances in law enforcement where we have to be the warriors, but if you look at it on a day-to-day basis, the majority of our actions are guardians, we are the guardians

of the community, and we should take a great deal of pride in that, but we need to let officers know nationwide that guardian and warrior are not mutually exclusive terms that we are expected to be both, really. now the impact on local government. as i said before, we are the most visible arm of local government, and as was stated before, we are the largest piece of that budget pie. and we have to look at ways that we can balance that. now what ideas are there to do that? one of the things that i think that we haven't looked at enough is the private/public engagements. there are a lot of people in every community that want to support law enforcement, but one, they don't know we need it, or two, they don't know how to go about it. so i think that that's very, very important as well as looking out into the community

and having them come back and assist us in whatever ways that we can. another thing that we need to look at is the possibility of technology, as a force multiplier. we also have to look at research. nobody has, every police chief who has their force cut will complain that they don't have enough officers to adequately protect their citizens, but there's never been any research that says, this is the appropriate number of officers, officer to citizen ratio. so we do need to do a great deal of research in that area. so, you know, as we ask our officers to, you know, go out there, be the mental health counselor, help all those individuals that have overdosed from drugs, educate the, educate and discipline the unruly juveniles in their community and

videotape the entire thing while the media is looking at them, saying, if you did a, you should have done b, and if you did b, you should have done a. we need to understand that we need to support law enforcement, but we also need to look at ways that law enforcement can work better with our municipalities as far as the funding goes, but i believe that this conference today was outstanding. that bringing those reforms and letting police departments know how they can implement them is invaluable, but we also, as law enforcement, need to understand that we need to look at ways to cut down on those budgets, because being the vast majority of every municipality budget and growing every year, just raises

increases, there's going to be a point at which that can't be sustained. and i'm fearful that that will turn into privatization of law enforcement. and i don't believe that's the way for us to go as a nation. but i thank you all for allowing me, especially, chip, to be involved in this outstanding event today. thank you. [ applause ] >> who wants the last question? okay. let's move outside and have some refreshments. i just want to thank all of our panelists today, i thought it was fascinating, very interesting. we will come out, as we normally do, with a good summary of this event in the near future, okay, so we'll share this with everybody, but thank you all for your participation today, nice