have been working for this room, access and equity. we want equitable ways to be able to raise our families. [laughter] [applause] david johns is here with his teach the babies movement, which has been a critical call for action. for early childhood education of a high-quality nature. we can assist in that movement by making sure that those programs are implemented in an equitable fashion and encouraging parents to teach their babies to read, talk, and sing for 30 minutes per day. to cultivate bring development. ultimately, civil rights activism like that must be complemented. and from collaboration from

service providers, with all of us working together accomplishing more than the best of us working alone. as we seek to move from demonstration the legislation, we cannot forget separation. after the doors of opportunity are opened for access, we must make sure that we have the skills to walk through it. unfortunately, many of very -- many of our young people are not prepared and that is on us. as we renew access to equity, it equals a better america. access plus equity equals a more perfect union. we can truly be a nation with liberty and justice for all. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you so much. my favorite part of the program, this is the part where we talk about what next. as we look out at the fights that have taken place, it was always the younger people who helped to leave -- lead the fight in the future. they led the fights in the past. it should be no different today. when you take the young people and ask the question? what is wrong with the youth of today? just look at what is right with the youth of today. you saw the video. who was on the front lines behind reverend sharpton and side-by-side with him? who was there with president obama needed those people to get the word out about the campaign in 2008? who was the one out there that made sure that the word got out? it was those young people,

tweeting twitting, we didn't even know what they were doing on those things but they turned the people out. to talk about what the use is doing, please bring up rihanna patterson, who will tell us what the youth have in store next. [applause] >> good morning, everyone. my name is rihanna patterson and i am the northeast regional director for the national northeast action network. i am so happy to be here this morning to bring you remarks from the perspective of the millennial generation. first i would like to say congratulations to all of our honorees this morning and your dedication to be like king and continue to be like came. i would like to thank reverend sharpton for his -- and his staff -- for hosting this annual

event. to honor those who are doing the work and making sure that we are trying and striving to be more like king. i also want to thank reverend sharpton for giving myself and other millennial generation leaders the platform his mentorship, and his shoulders to stand on. after seeing the film, "soma," last year, i realize that dr. king understood the importance of bridging the gap between old and the new. then a young john lewis understood the need for strategic planning. the two of them were the links that bridged both generations together. seeing that dr. king and reverend sharpton were both known when they started, i feel that my message to young people is to all americans, we have to

study his character and his implementation in order to reach greater heights. we have to understand that in order to make the movement progress, we must come together and get out of the mentality that we can do it alone. dr. king knew that it would take more than just that to make this movement progress. i also want to leave you with this note -- we are going to have to come together in order to make the world a better place. so, i leave you with this scripture that has played a role in my life and, i am sure, everyone knows it -- a house divided it -- divided against itself cannot stand, let's come together in peace and equality. thank you. [applause]

>> i am very proud of her. you did a great job. [applause] at this time we would like to thank our sponsors for helping us to put on this event year. we are honored to have lots of sponsors who give us their support. the first is the american federation of government employees. next is comcast. city lily. sci you 1199. walmart. next we have ge and luke capital. 32 bj. i am not sure -- i hear one over there. b et networks. aetna. jackson lewis. pepsico. and mtc.

i would also like to knowledge that we have the honorable judge and a black worm rigsby here with us. thank you for joining us. i know you have had such a wonderful time. yes, he will do it. but we will say that for next year. i wanted to thank the d.c. bureau staff for putting on this event. it has been a long week, but there is lots more to come. we have a long road ahead. thank you for joining us this morning. we know that it was early and we look forward to seeing you again at some of our future events. please check out our website for more information, as well as our annual convention, taking place in new york city, we hope that

>> good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for attending the first public hearing and listening session on the president's task force on 21st century policing. my name is ronald davis. i'm the director of the department of justice's community organization policing services, also known as the cops office and i'm serving as the executive director for the task force. on december 1st, president obama announced his intent to form the president's task force on 21st century policing with the idea of coming up with concrete recommendations to build a gap in the trust between law enforcement and the communities they serve. while the recommendations were to build trust, the president also made it clear to do so in a manner that includes our historic reduction in crime and enhanced public safety. when he signed the executive order, the president identified two coe shares to serve in this task force. to my left is professor lori robinson at george mason university, but professor robinson, before going to george mason was also the assistant attorney general for the department of justice's office of justice programs. next to professor robinson is philadelphia police commissioner charles ramsey who is also a co-chair and has a very distinguished law enforcement career including serving not only as a police commissioner in philadelphia but also the police chief right here in washington, d.c. today's hearing is -- i wanted

to make sure everybody is going to be know is going to be webcast and live streamed. for those watching on line, you do have the ability to watch on the cops website and there will be a period at the end where we will take questions from those in attendance and those on line. feel free to go to our website or you can give comments directly at comments@task force police.u.s. or you can post your comments on twitter at police task force. so at this point what i want to do is really -- is really turn over to the co-chairs they can now lead the task force and you get to know our members and we can start our hearings. we have an ambitious schedule.

we look toward to getting through a very robust and exciting day listening to our witnesses. let me say this before i turned over to the co-shares. on behalf of president he want to thank you them for their service as well as their witnesses. as you can imagine, it's not paying a lot. they are volunteering their time and service. this is a very important endeavor. the president has made it clear that he is personally interested in this. this is a priority and we want to thank everyone for their commitment, for their time, for them lending their expertise and their perspectives to this national discussion. so we just wanted to take time to thank them. at this point i will turn it over to our co-chair, professor lori robinson. >> thank you so much, ron, and thank you and your staff for the tremendous job you are doing in providing support to the task force. good morning to all of you and welcome to our first hearing. i'm very pleased to be co-chairing the task force and to be co-chairing it with commissioner ramsey. and i'm certainly honored to have been asked by the president to serve in this capacity.

i'm also very impressed by the high caliber and the dedication of our broad-based and diverse task force. i've been involved in criminal justice work for more than three decades. i've been with the department of justice as ron mentioned, with the nonprofit sector, and now in academia and it's very clear to me that we're facing a very tough challenge right now in criminal justice. but since the president asked chuck ramsey and me to serve in this capacity back on december 1st, i've been very struck by the number of people, of really hundreds, who have come forward from all walks of life and from all around the country to make suggestions, offer recommendations for steps that can be taken here to address

these issues and these problems. these are very sincere proposals that are offered in good faith, and i have to say that that gives me optimism that americans working together really are problem solvers. now the president has asked us to come up with concrete proposals on a very short timeline by march 2nd, and he's made it clear that he doesn't want kind of general philosophyized. he wants very pragmatic suggestions. so our goal here today is to be in a listening mode. to do a lot of listening. and we have in fact really distinguished group of witnesses before us, starting with our first panel and running through a five panels today. so we have a lot to do on a very constricted schedule and

so i want to turn quickly to my co-chair commissioner ramsey. >> thank you, laurie and good morning everyone. it is an honor to be here with you all of you today to begin a conversation around this very important topic. just a little bit more about myself. i've been a member of law enforcement now since 1968. i'm a native chicagoan. i spent close to 30 years as a member of the chicago police department. i served here in washington, d.c. as police chief for almost nine years and i'm currently the police commissioner for the city of philadelphia for the past seven. so i've seen a lot of changes in policing over the years, but i also recognize that more changes needs to be made and that's why we're here. we need to think about ways in which police can be more effective in doing their jobs, reaching out to the community. we'll be talking about a variety of issues today. the focus is on building trust

and legitimate si, but in the future we'll be tackling topics such as policy, training oversite, education, wellness, social media, technology. there's a variety of topics as we move around for various hearings that we'll be focusing on, bringing in subject matter experts, hearing from the community, hearing from law enforcement officials, so that we have a pretty broad view of the issues and recommendations that people would like to make that will -- most of which will probably be included in our final report to the president. so it's an enormous task, but one that is very doable in my opinion. i think the short timeline and in speaking with the president, reflects the sense of sur jens si that he has in dealing with this particular issue and the sense of urgency that we all have in dealing with this particular issue. so we have every intent of meeting the time lines laid out

by the president and come up with concrete recommendations that will lead to change. thank you very much. again, and i'm going to turn this over now so that the individual task force members can introduce themselves briefly and we're going to start with the chief of police in tucson. >> good morning. i also am extremely honored to be here and to be honest i expect someone to come up those stairs to come up any moment to say excuse me, chief, there's been a mistake. but the fact that i do get to represent law enforcement and the interest here is very important. i take that with an extreme level of importance. i'm a native tucsonian. along the border we share the issues with immigration with texas, new mexico, and

california. that in and itself has caused a lot of consternation within our states. you may have heard about some of the legislation that's been passed in arizona. this legislation has had the effect of putting local law enforcement at odds with the very community that we are appointed to serve and to protect, and i've been in opposition to that legislation since it first came out, but once it was passed, gone through the supreme court challenge and portions were allowed to stand, i'm obligated to enforce it. so i've had object lessons in legislation and circumstances that really hamper the relationship between local law enforcement and their communities. i hope to bring some of the lessons that we've learned there to bear during the course of this task force. so thank you. >> good morning. my name is brian stephenson and i'm the executive director of

the equal justice initiative in montgomery, alabama. i'm a human rights attorney and the work of eji is focused on providing legal services to poor people, to incarcerated people, and condemned people. i spent most of my career in the deep south. my office is in montgomery alabama, and we've worked in that region and across the country trying to deal with some of these big issues. i bring with the other members of this task force a lot of concern about how we can improve policing in our communities. i'm honored to be in this position and to have this responsibility. i'm particularly hopeful that we can find ways to create connections between law enforcement and many people who live in the margins of our society, the poor, people of color, people with disabilities, people who have felt too often excluded from the mainstream of society. i'm very hopeful that we can make tremendous progress and again very excited to be a part of this task force.

>> good morning. my name is shaun smoot. i'm the director and chief counsel for the police benevolent protector association of illinois. i've spent the last 25 years of my life representing the interests of police officers in departments as large as the city of chicago and as small as a city like rochester, illinois. i share my colleagues hope and look forward to working with other members of the task force in coming up with some practical recommendations for the president that can be shared, that can, i think, attain the goal that all of us have which is improving safety for everyone, law enforcement officers, citizens, and look forward to working with other members of the task force. >> hi, everybody. my name is

connie rice. i'm about to lose my microphone. my name is connie rice and i am a civil rights attorney who is based out in l.a. my specialty is police reform. my biggest project has been with lapd and i have good news to report on that front. we are charging the preytoran guard that used to be american warrior cops. they will say they have changed and i've changed. we're working together to get a police force to protect the community and to enforce civil rights. that's how they begin to see themselves which is a whole new way for lapd to itself. chief bratten, when he was with us, got so frustrated with my meddling that he got me a chief of police badge, you think you

are the chief of police, you may as well have a badge to go along with it. we are actually very good friends and i'm helping him in new york as well, so police reform by default ended up becoming my specialty. i look forward to helping this group identify the ways that we can help police change. the police will tell you that we in the community also had to change, and they will say, well, connie changed as much as we did and i'm fine with that. if that's how they need to see it, it may well be the case. that's what we'll do. but there is a way to get the police to see us as human beings. they are supposed to protect. not as arrest fodder. they should not look at our little black boys and see an arrest stat or see somebody they can beat with a baton. they should see someone when they look at our little kids in

the ghetto, we should see their sons and they should want to protect them. thank you. >> good morning. i'm sue raar, i started my career in law enforcement as a patrol deputy. worked my way up through the ranks of the king county sheriffs office, the metropolitan around seattle. i was with their office, last seven years as the elected sheriff. little did i know that was my training to become the director of the police academy. i now have the responsibility for training 10,000 police officers across the state of washington, and i'm very honored to be part of this task force. i think there's a great opportunity for us right now to really take a hard look at the culture of policing and that has been evolving in washington state.

we've put a name to that transition. we call it moving from a culture of warriors to a culture of guardians and i believe if we do a better job of training and resetting expectations, we will get our police officers to see themselves as protectors rather than conquerers and i think many of us in the task force are aligned in that type of thinking. we need to reengage with the community and become servants of the community. thank you. >> good morning. my name is brittany packnit. i'm currently executive director of teach for america in st. louis. we serve 24,000 low income children. mostly children of color and children who have been directly and indirectly impacted by the crisis in ferguson. but as a native st. louisian and someone who lives about 12 minutes from ferguson and who sees very clearly the responsibility and linkage between representing our children inside of the

classroom and outside of classroom and my personal work i have been an active ferguson activist and one of the youngest members of the ferguson commission, and i have been spending a great deal of time working with and talking with young people who encourage their leadership during this process. so i'm certainly honored to be here, to help represent young voices and voices from ferguson so that we can not only impact disruptive change but systemic change. >> good morning. my name is tracy meers. i'm a law professor at yale university. before coming to yale, i spent about 15 years teaching law at the university of chicago. most of my career, for the last 20 years has been focused on looking at and understanding the dynamics of crime in urban communities. the connection between high crime neighborhoods, low income

experiences, and disadvantaged. i've spent a lot of time working on those issues, developing and helping to develop violence reduction strategies in chicago and new york city and schenectedy and albany and northern california and connecticut and the goal of much of this work has been about understanding ways in which to achieve public safety while encouraging public trust through pursuit of police legitimacy which we'll be talking about today. i'm really honored to be a part of this panel and work with my fellow members on achieving this goal. thank you. >> good morning. my name is jose lopez. i'm the lead organizer of make the road new york, a new york city and new york state based group with 16,000 members that works on really just achieving respect and dignity for all communities, particularly

immigrant communities and folks who are new arrivals to this country. i have been with make the road and have started the youth power project that the organization for 15 years. currently working on issues of police accountability, housing rights, and workers rights. i'm a brooklyn boy. i'm the son of two migrants, a janitor and a seamstress and outside of my work, i'm also on the steering committee on communities united for police reform in unprecedented campaign in new york city to challenge policing as we know it, and over the last three years have been working closely with the public science project through the kuneeg graduate center, working with a team of researchers and students and professors to

further explore the stop question, and frisk program and the impacts on young people of color. >> good morning. i'm dr. cedric alexander. i'm the director of public safety with dekalb county, georgia. i've served with the department of homeland security as a federal security director there at dallas-ft. worth international airport. prior to that, i had an opportunity to serve as deputy commissioner of criminal

justice in the state of new york and i'm also a psychologist, clinical psychologist. i trained both at the university of miami and the university of rochester, respectively, and both departments of psychiatry there where i received clinical training. my police career started back in 1977 in florida, and prior to going back to school to do doctoral work, i spent a number of years with the miami-dade police department. for me, this entire journey and having an opportunity to be part of this task force was most rewarding, very honestly, for me about this is to be able to serve on this panel with such a distinguished group of diverse individuals that represent this country, in every sense of the word and to me that is honorable and i'm just delighted to be a part of this group. thank you. >> so thank you, members. as i mentioned earlier, as serving as executive director the department of justice is

providing the administrative support for the task force through my office, the office of community oriented policing services. let me say this, what i didn't tell you i spent 28 years in law enforcement, 20 years in great city of oakland and 8 years in east palo alto, california, coming from that law enforcement background it is not only exciting, it is one of those moments in time, an historical moment, you can really feel the change and everyone wants to come together and have this discussion, that we can really look at defining public safety to be more than just the absence of crime but to include the presence of justice as well. we look forward to that work. supporting the task force is the cops office as i mentioned. the outstanding team. many many of them are here. we also built a team of experts to help support this and two specific i'm going to identify right now are sitting at the table. we have two technical advisers who are quite frankly leaders in the law enforcement civil rights community as well. one is darrell stephens. darrell if you could raise your hand for us.

he's the executive director of major cities police association and has a long and distinguished career in public safety and steve rickman who has been many years in the law enforcement arena in research and practices and has worked on a lot of projects with the department of justice and has served i think as a director of the program in washington, d.c. as well. we're fortunate, quite frankly not only to have the great members of the task force but the support team that is there. i think after you listen to this introduction, one thing is crystal clear. the president put together a heck of a team to actually lead this effort and to have this national discussion, the diverse perspective, the expertise, and so with that, i think as they say it's time to get busy. madam chair. >> we're going to start now with our first panel. subject matter experts. the full bios of our witnesses today are on our website, and also for the audience here on hand-outs. if i were going to read and my co-chair read their

full bios it would probably take all day. we have a very distinguished group, so i'm going to be very brief. we're going to start out as our lead witness charles owingle tree who is jesse clemenco professor of law and director of the charles hamilton institute for race and justice for harvard university. professor, welcome, very happy to have you. >> thank you very much. i'm very happy to be here. let me say this first, i want to thank all the members of this task force, thank president obama for creating it. i think it's very important to think about the role of the police in the 21st century and how important it's going to be. i want this task force to think about as opposed to to just looking forward, think back about all the issues that have happened centuries ago and that are very important. the work of queen mother motley moore, the

work of people like rosa parks folks who have had a very big issue in the civil rights movement, all those people are very important. think about charles hamilton houston, a native of washington, d.c. who trained thurgood marshall who died much too young, but made it clear that race needed to be dealt with fairly and appropriately. i want to talk about where this city is going. i in a sense cut my teeth here as a public defender right on indiana avenue, northwest. had a lot of cases, a lot of african-american men and women who were clients and i see the same problems that we saw in the 1980s, creating in the 21st century, and we need to address those things in a very serious way. let me say what i hope will happen. i'm hoping that people will be able to in a sense=rohncnyk= involved in community service. that was the focus. police

would get out of their cars. we see people being or rested, killed by police. and we need to address that in a serious way ch i'm suggesting we need to talk about b police beingen volved in community service. they would leave their badges alone. they would be away from individuals, and there was a sense they played basketball and soccer with kids. they would take them out for a hamburger and some fries. that was community policing, and we're now a militarization of police in many places. they have the guns, tanks, weapons, and they are killing young black men and we think about

the situation in ferguson that in a sense caused all this, it is not a weekly event or monthly event. it's a year on event and we have to stop it and we have to stop it right now, and so i would suggest that this task force take a serious look at what people need to do and what need to be in the police force. for example, i think the police officers should be not just officers. they also need to be social workers. what? what is he talking about? the whole idea is they need to get out and play a role with the community and make a big difference and make the difference in their lives and i think that's going to make young people do that. if you look at the recent attention given to police, i see kids who are six years old holding their hands up like they saw happen in ferguson, sure that the president has some good ideas on what the

21st century policing should involve and what you are recommending to him, and believe me, i have some ways of getting to and through to him if he doesn't follow your recommendations. he has to follow them because i think the reality is that this task force is talking about the most important and critical issue in our lifetime, and dealing with it right now and i congratulate everyone on the task force for the work that

you are doing. thank you. >> thank you so much, professor ogeltree. next we have jennifer everhart who is professor of psychology at stanford university. thank you. >> thank you. i'm honored to be here. for two decades my research has focused on issues of racial bias and stereotyping, especially in the context of criminal justice. currently i'm assisting the oakland police department as a subject matter expert in connection with their reform efforts. we cannot have a discussion about trust and professor of law and alsos professor of psychology. i plan to talk about the problems of racial bias and how the growing use of body cameras creates an opportunity to move beyond this. many people think racial bias must be deliberate and intentional but contemporary research suggests that bias can

be implicit as well as explicit. people can act on biases that they don't even know they have. people can express bias despite their best intentions and desires. the expression of bias is not limited to so-called bad people and it is certainly not limited to police officers. the problem is a widespread one that arises from our history from our culture, and from racial inequalities that still per vade our society. i recommend that we offer training on racial bias in law enforcement agencies to raise awareness. raising awareness alone is not enough. agencies need to do more to lessen the impact of bias on the decisions officers make and on the day-to-day interactions they have with the public. one way to do more is to make better use of these tools and technology already at our dispostal.

both of these responses, however, i believe are too narrow. rather than simply using video footage as evidence to vindicate or implicate a particular officer when things go bad we can analyze tens of thousands of routine police community encounters. researchers have already begun to test whether people lodge fewer complaints when the cameras are on versus off. we can even do more. my recommendation is that we leverage the technology of body cameras to strengthen police community relations not just to document them. body camera footage from difficult ecounters could be used to help officers use best

practices. although it takes extraordinary skill on the part of officers to avoid escalating the difficult situation typically we don't give much attention to those instances in which things go right. body cameras can allow us to do so. the video footage could also be used to evaluate training. we could look at footage preand post training to assess the degree to which that training makes a difference and for how long. we could compare the interactions of police officers who have gone through procedural justice training with those who have not. are there aspects of that training that are harder to translate to actual street encounters to others? and if this is the case we could feed that information back to the researchers so that they could fine tune the training they offer. finally, we could use footage to develop early warning systems, we could automate our analysis so that certain footage gets flagged for

additional inspection. and when events happen that shake the nation, events like what happened in ferguson and new york we could look to these early warning systems to get an immediate read or pulse on how those events might reverberate in the day-to-day encounters police officers are having in other cities like in oakland and chicago or philadelphia. agencies commonly use data to make predictions about crime patterns and to determine their strategies for arrests. they could also begin to use data to build commune relations, to build trust. currently the information we care most about is getting left out. it's time to use our technology and the wealth of information it can give us to do more. the problems we are discussing today are serious but they are not intractible. thank you.

why should police legitimacy be a central concern? in the same decades where we've seen this decline in crime public trust in police has not increased. further, there is a large and persistent racial gap in trust

e9n' police.1:b9wwn these problems are for many reasons. one has been alluded to is they contribute to an ongoing of racially tinged controversies with police. but more broadly when people distrust the police, they are less likely to obey the law if people don't trust the police, there isn't a climate of reassurance in communities that encourages people to actively promote economic and social growth in their own cities. a focus of mine is on building police legitimacy provides an opportunity to address these problems. based upon research findings we know how to strengthen trust in the people's trust depends on whether they feel that the police, police department's and individual police officers are exercising their authority fairly. this procedural justice finding has been widely replicated in our research and it suggests that people care both about whether the police make decisions fairly and treat people respectfully. what does that mean? the public wants to be listened to when police policies are developed. they

want an opportunity to state their case when they are dealing with the police officer. they want an explanation for police policies and actions that allows them to see that the police are acting in an unbiased way that shows that policies can be understood and that they reflect shared goals and they want to be treated with dignity and respect when they deal with the police. the issue of perceived disrespect has been particularly central to recent public controversy involving the police. we know the factors, in other words, that are central to shaping public trust in the police and they suggest some clear policy$ implications. first, very the federal government should support efforts to restructure police

departments using the principles -- now we can focus on public trust in the police. this issue has become especially important in recent years as police have come in contact with a broader range of people in the community and younger people. this needs to be factored into policy decisions. at this time we know that the overall impact of police contact is to undermine trust. so our recommendation is that the federal government should support the development and implementation of policies that build trust. second, police officers need to be trained to recognize the importance of fair treatment as well as being provided for achieving that goal to strengthen public trust. the federal government should support the development and use of new training models.

third, both police chiefs and police officers who are successful in building trust need to be recognized and promoted. finally, efforts to change the culture of policing will be more successful if they also build officer trust in officers' own police departments. this involves addressing officers concerns about well being and safety. when police departments organize themselves around the principles of procedural justice, they lower officer stress on the job and improve the physical health and well being of their own police officers. and when officers then act in ways that emphasize fairness and use less force, this promotes officer safety. so the federal government should support efforts to

restructure police department using the principles of procedural justice. there's a much-sided saying that a crisis is also an opportunity. today we have an opportunity to rethink the mission of the police in the 24th century. this is because the police have been so successful at taking crime out of the equation and now we can focus on public trust in the police. >> thank you so much. our final witness on this panel is samuel walker who is professor emeritus of criminal justice at the university of nebraska in omaha. >> thank you. i appreciate the opportunity to speak to the task force on this very urgent national problem. in response to the tragic events in ferguson, missouri and staten island, new york, much of the public discussion has focused on deaths at the hands of the police and the related grand jury investigations.

i want to broaden the discussion to talk about routine day-to-day policing. in particular, i want to focus on the problem of disrespectful and offensive language by police officers directed at people in the community. this includes racial and ethnic slurs, common eventual -- eventual garretts. disrespectful police occur all the time day in and day out. if the mandate of this task force is to build legitimacy and trust in the police, this is where it should again. this is where you should focus your efforts. the routine day-to-day policing. now, there's some people who would say that language it's not that important compared with deaths at the hands of police. i disagree. i think it's extremely important simply because this is where people meet the police and there's the problem of how police treat people. some people ask, well, gee, how come it is this, really? there's a lot of research over

the decades on the prefles of offensive language by the police. just to take one example, from current data from citizen complaints, across the country. in san jose, a 2013, offensive language complaints were 17% of all citizen complaints that were filed. washington, d.c. right here, 26% of all the citizen complaints filed in 2013. new york city, it might be as high as 40%, although the way the ccrb there classifies complaints it's hard to tell. but official complaint data is really just the tip of the iceberg because we also know from research that among people who feel mistreated by the police, only a very small percentage actually file a formal complaint, so the problem is much bigger than even these data would indicate. now, disrespectful and offensive language has four very serious adverse consequences.

first, it's an injury to the person or persons to whom it's directed. it harms them. second, over time, in the aggregate, it lkds a reservoir of distrust and anger at the police. and this is especially true in communities of color. third, in particular encounters, offensive and disrespectful language by the police leads to an escalation and also often unnecessary inappropriate uses of force. if deescalation is an important new direction for policing this is one place really to begin. fourth is under mines standards of professionalism. if it goes unpunished and i believe it does, officers are, well, you can do these things, you can get away with it so that needs to be corrected.

now, the president apparently asked for very specific recommendations. here's my proposal. i am proposing that the united states department of justice take the lead in developing a respectful policing initiative. rpi. respectful policing initiative. and that includes four elements. first of all, there would be mandatory annual in service training for all police officers. police departments have in service training already. it would be very easy to incorporate this into their existing programs. second, the department of justice should make federal funding from the department contingent upon a certification that an agency is in fact conducting a respectful policing training. third, the department of justice should take the lead in developing a model policy for departments on respectful policing, and fourth department of justice should take the lead in developing a

model training curriculum for all departments. now, in conclusion, i brought with me sort of a golden oldie. it's the commissioner report 1968, presidential commission appointed in response to the riots of the 1960s. if you go to pages 302, 303, you will find discussion with evidence on the prefles of disrespectful and offensive language by the police at that time. we did not fix the problem back then. we have not fixed this problem in the intervening 47 years. we need to fix it now. thank you. >> thank you so much, professor walker. i'm now going to be turning to the panel for questions. and i believe that shawn smoot had our first question. >> thank you, madam chair. professor tyler, is there a department or jurisdiction that

the task force can look to as an example of a place that has been successful in formulateing and implementing and i don't mean to mischaracterize your testimony but per septembertively fair policies, i would ask you as a follow-up question is there a department or jurisdiction that we can look to as an example of a place that has been successful in formulating departmentally or internal procedural justice within the police department? >> in terms of communities, i would use new haven as an example of a community that has gone back to the idea of community policing. they have implemented a set of policies and practices, for example, every new police officer spends their first year in a neighborhood getting to know the people in that neighborhood. they have had success building

community trust in the police and at the same time because of heightened levels of cooperation, their clearance rates have gone up. crime has gone down. so that would be to me a very good example of a smaller town. i think in terms of a large town, chicago would be an example. chicago has an ambitious effort to retrain its police officers along principles of fair chicago has an ambitious effort to retrain its police officers along principles of fair treatment. they have trained over 8,000 of their officers in a one-day eight-hour training program. and so that's an example, i think of a larger department. chicago is interesting because when they did start retraining their officers, they discovered that the main complaint the officers had was that their own department didn't seem to use fair procedures which has led them now to rethink policies for promotion, policies for discipline, so i would say that's an example of the community that then has redirected its energy to

thinking about the internal structure of the police department. >> okay. i just wanted to thank the entire panel for your testimony this morning. it's very informative. >> can i say one word, mr. smoot, about that? >> i would ask the task force to look very closely at what's happening in boston. i was surprised to find out that their chief of police superintendent now, william evans, says very clear that he's trying to make sure that officers aren't carrying guns, they are not shooting people. he's training them to do different work, and the problem that i mentioned just briefly is the problem of the state police who come in withheld mets, guns, tanks, and we need to -- i know that's beyond your jurisdiction, but i think you have to look at anyone wearing a uniform and who is -- >> not to interrupt, but it's not beyond our jurisdiction. >> okay, good. >> we'll take it on.

>> i want to make sure. look at state police, i think that's going to make a big difference. >> thank you. >> 2 related questions. thank you for being here. professor walker, you talk about making federal funds contingent upon this respectful policing certification. my question kind of as a follow-up to this is in your opinion should there be the removal of federal funds if the kinds of standards in respectful policing are violated? in ferguson, i myself witnessed quite a bit of the disrespectful language that you talked about as well as disrespectful actions, and the language came before the actions, i wonder in cases like that and others if we find there are patterns in practice or in crisis situations like we saw in ferguson, violations of those respectful policing standards should federal funding be removed in your opinion.

and as a follow-up professor ogeltree, you talked about how communities felt they are under the rule of an occupying army. in ferguson, i know that that's exactly how the community felt and so i'm wondering in your opinion how that was exacerbated by the crisis in ferguson, that you feeling you discuss and what do you think are steps toward reconciliation and healing for the community? >> well, to answer the first part of your question, my specific proposal is to mandate the training and to make federal funding contingent upon it. what happens if the department is in fact doing the training but the language, you know, offensive behavior continues? that's a separate and more difficult question. i haven't thought that through and i haven't presented that in my proposal here. if things get that serious, then we have the special litigation section within the civil rights division which can investigate a department for continued

violation of civil rights. there are a number of different avenues that can be used. >> i have to say that my response is a holistic one and it may not be well received but i think that the community in ferguson needs to rethink what they are doing. the majority of the community is african-american. yet the city council is majority white, the police department is majority white, the crimes are committed involving black men, a lot. ferguson needs to grow up. those are my words. everything has to change. education, housing jobs. all those things have to change to ensure that people are on the same level and responding the same way. i think the person has submitted to the community. if we fix ferguson, we are on

the first step. that's the step that we're going to be taking. >> connie rice, i think you have a point that's on our last exchange. >> yes. i'm about to jump out of my skin because nobody listed l.a.p.d. as one of the forces that has transformed itself. we're in the middle of 14 years. to change how lapd cops think and behave. i have to put our community on that list of chicago, boston and new haven because they are truly extraordinary. i can say that because i trained them. before chief bratton left, as i said before, he gave me a badge because he said, connie you think you're the chief of police. i might as well give you a badge

to reflect that delusion. >> so it is extraordinary to see l.a.p.d. cops, who used to be like a praetorian guard. they were your worst nightmare if you were a civil rights lawyer. i know. i sued them every day. and, now, i'm working with them every day. in the housing projects. now, if you can get the police to bond with housing project public housing project populations, you've done something. and if you can get a force that used to think of itself as praetorian warriors into thinking of themselves as social workers who may have to use their guns on a very bad day but, in general, don't, and they see themselves as guardians of poor people, you have really accomplished something.

this body is going to have to acknowledge it. we're so busy doing the work, we haven't communicated it with anybody. 14 years of daily work and it takes a long time. we have never looked up to tell anyone about it. i think i'm going to have to. >> tracy. >> i have two questions. one is for the professor and the other is for all of the panelists collectively. first, professor, i know you are an expert on implicit bias. i am wondering if you could say a little bit about what he kind of training that police could undergo with respect to bias. i have heard people say that biases can be overcome.

is that the way you would characterize it? if not, how would you think about the relationship between training police officers and the issue of bias and what progress we can make on that issue. that's the first question for you. for the panelists in general, i was hoping that each of you would speak to professor ogletre's very compelling charge that what we need to do, and i've put it in my terms, i was going to say treaty. we need to repudiate justice taney's infamous words in dred scott through repeal.

i'm interested in knowing what you as panelists think about just some idea, some recommendation, for what it would mean to repudiate what justice connie said given that we are working primarily on leasing and, in fact, in the last exchange with brittany that you just said, look, you know, there's so many other things that need to be done. how do we think about that? >> yes, the implicit racial bias training focuses on making police officers, you know, aware of the social scientific research on bias, the contemporary research so awareness is a big part of it. you do not even know you are affected by bias. a lot of the focus on the training is to help people understand the pervasiveness other and to help them reflect

on how bias could influence day to day policing decisions. their awareness is a big part of this. as far as changing bias, i would say bias can change. bias is situational. it's not just something that people have in their heads. but it's something that is perpetuated and promoted by the situations we find ourselves in. the police departments around the country have a role to play there. they set the tone. they sort of create the structure under which officers are operating under. and sometimes those structures or those policies can sort of dampen the expression of bias or make it less likely or sometimes can make it more likely.

>> and, why don't the other panelists now weigh in on the second question. >> i think the proper response is through recruitment, training policies, everything that we have to achieve the point where police officers treat people as human beings. and they're entitled to all the respect and dignity and rights that all people are entitled to. it won't be easy and there's simply many ways of getting there. it's a 365 day a year task. it is not going to be done by one four-hour session by whoever the person is. it has to be done really day in and day out in terms of how police departments conduct themselves. the most important would be at the sergeant level. the sergeant talks to an officer

after an consent saying you did not violate department policies. but your language, the way you did this, it's really not what i want to see. it's not what this department wanted to see. >> i've heard many police chiefs say you can't arrest your way out of crime.. and i think the point that they're making is that at the end of the day, what we really need is we need economic social development in our communities. if the police can be retrained to think of their role in the community as not being a force that is designed to control a population, but rather a service, that is having the goal of creating the sense of safety and reassurance that allows communities to develop themselves. and i think it changes the way officers think about what their role in the community is supposed to be. then, when they see themselves behaving disrespectfully or undermining the well being of people in the community, they recognize that that's counter to their mission. and once the police understand

the different mission for themselves, i think a lot of these problems become less serious. >> i want to just say quickly to take the professor's work a little further, she spoke and we had a sense and i hope this task force will understand, implicit bias is not racial incrimination. you need to -- racial discrimination. you need to understand that. and she made very clear that we all have implicit biases. we're born with these things in our brain that make us react in certain ways that make us appear to be racist or sexist or homophobic. all of those things. we need to make sure that we read the professor's work to understand that. and the second thing, i think that this task force, the focus on police is completely right.

but you can't change a city just by changing the police. you have to change the mayor. you have to change all of the government. you have to change teachers. you have to change the people in the correction facilities. it's a big task that i think all of that has a big difference on what you're able to do. and i'm hoping the task force will delve into the areas that in a sense, make the police work harder if they do not have the training that makes a big difference in terms of what they're willing, ready, willing and able to do. >> thank you all for your perspectives. let me turn now to jose lopez. >> okay. thank you. i have two questions. i guess the first could be answered either by professor walker or professor tyler. and i'll start with that. kind of given the conversation that we're having now, around respectful policing and the discussion around implicit bias, it just makes me think about kind of my own experiences in new york and whether or not

through the department's stop question and frisk program whether or not a more respectful interaction with police officers -- whether or not that makes me feel any better. given the fact that i know they stop in the first place was racially motivated. can a stop ever be respectful? or can that interaction ever be respectful between me and an officer. can i feel a respected is my understanding is that the stop was racially motivated? >> so i think that there are really two levels to react to those kinds of policies and practices.

one is the individual stop. and, as sam walker mentioned when people are talking about why they are upset about these stops, they most frequently talk about disrespect, humiliation, insults. one is that the police need to change the way that they treat people and the way they deal with them. the larger is the policies and practices of the police. irrespective of whether a police officer can be polite on one person to one day in one spot, people react to policies and practices in their community. those need to be perceived as fair as well. i do not think we are saying that the police can legitimate a racist policy by being polite to people. there are two separate issues and people are aware of both of them. >> we have to separate the actions and the defense to describe -- and the events you

describe. first of all, they need to limit the number of stops they do. quite a kind of stops. what's happening in new york city was that they were being stopped without reasonable suspicion. that has to stop. in terms of the number. second, people make a clear distinction between the outcome of the stop itself and the process. so the officer explains the reason for the stop, that mitigates the impact of the stop itself. and it helps build a respectful relationship. >> can i add to that? to some extent, fairness is important. fairness is something that can

be shaped by the racial disparities that people live with. and the more extreme those racial disparities are, the more fair if they think punitive policies are. the more fair they think punitive policing policies are. so i think we also need to put on the table, you know, the role that, you know, disparities in the criminal justice system, the role that they play in producing racial bias and the role that they play in sort of leading us to support policies that we're now critiquing. >> and i'll just say a quick word if i can before this ends lorie. i wrote two books. one of which talks about race. but the more significant one

which goes directly to your question is the one, the presumption of guilt. now, everybody in law knows that no such thing is the presumption of guilt. but i titled that because people are guilty because of their race, because of what they're wearing, because of where they're going. and that needs to be addressed in a big sense. and, i also think that the task force can look at the issue of how important it is to look at the issue of how important it is and how race trumps class. and i think i shouldn't say this, but i'm going to say this. my colleague and my dear friend and who i represent, professor henry louis gates was arrested in his own home, in the 21st century, 2009. race trumps class. i think we need to understand how important that is. what we need to do to make sure. and i've heard this a thousand times and i'm sure many of the people on the panel have, as well. people will come to me and say we're not talking about you professor. we're talking about them. i am them. and so i don't wear a tie or a suit everywhere i go.

but the reality is people look at you, and they look at your face and that determines whether you're black or brown or white that determines how engaged they can be in arresting you, questioning you, expecting you to respond in a certain way. and i don't want to walk carefully around. i want to be able to be free. and i think that's very important to talk about the i -- the issue of how race trumps class and how that becomes a big issue that we need to get under. it also means that class is not something that will remove you from the scope of being interrogated, stopped, arrested, charged, shot at, or killed by the police. >> you have to second question. >> my second question is for charles.

it seems to me that when we look at the department of criminal justice, that the d.o.j. has not been as active in pursuing cases such as the ones, you know which i think call for the convening of this panel. so, as my sense of reduced department of justice activity in this area consistent with reality and then the second part of that question is, if so, thinking about the function of the department of justice, thinking about the section 1983 in terms of holding police officers liable, are there other stay chuts or recommendations that could be proposed that we think could be more effective? >> i think it's a great question. 1983 is a good idea. this task force can pursue it.

i think eric holder has been far better than a lot of the other attorneys general in pursuing this racial injustice. he's been a very important force carrying that on. he went to ferguson. he looked at the trayvon martin case. every case he has been trying to figure out what the department of justice can do. they have limited jurisdiction and they cannot do everything. they can at least raise the issue and hope that prosecutors can say okay, we're following what the attorney general did in washington as a message of what happened. but i think this committee, the task force, can make some recommendations for the next attorney general who i think will be loretta lynch and tell her that we need to continue to make sure that race is not an issue that divides us and there's no hope that the department of justice is going to be the leader. they need to be a leader and ensure that racial justice is available to every single person, regardless of class or race or situation.

and i think that is going to be a very important step in the right direction. >> cedric alexander, i know you had a question? >> yes, thank you all very much for the wonderful contributions you have made to the country, as well, too. and i think over time, it's going to prove itself to be very valuable. i just want to say thank you to all of you. this question is primarily for dr. tyler. i would ask that each of you might want to share your thought about this. you said at the beginning in opening your remarks, was very profound to stop to think about it when i stopped to think about it. you've indicated, and i'm paraphrasing here, that as crime has gone down in this country, discontent in police-community

relations in a negative way has gone up. could it you talk more about that? i think that is an interesting observation and deserves more discussion. i'd like to hear from your colleagues in terms of how they think about that. i have my own theories around it . i think they will be pretty much congruent with yours. would you like to speak a little bit more about that? >> sure. i think that the main point to be made is that over the last 30 years, the level of public trust and confidence in the police in america has been pretty much the same. between 50% and 60% of adult americans say that they have trust and confidence in their local police. second, there's frequently a 25, even 30% gap between african american and white respondents

in any particular community, with african americans strikingly less likely to indicate trust and confidence. and, again, that has been constant. there's been no sign that cap is disappearing. so the framework for a lot of the events that we're talking about today, the staten island events, and many other events is the backdrop where police efforts to reduce crime, the fact that crime has gone down down. hast not impacted those communities. >> did others want to comment on that, as well? >> i just wanted to make one short comment. although crime has gone down the same policies are in place to some extent. the same policies that people experience as problematic. broken windows, for example.

>> so, real quick, so in theory, it would not be far-fetched to conclude that in some way, if crime has gone down, in in country, but discontent with police has gone up, particularly in communities of color, then that would suggest that to me, it suggests that those two entities are in no way communicating with each other. and, obviously, those that feel this continued discontent with police are being targeted in some kind of way that suggests crime is being, you know, crime is being reduced. i mean, it's just -- and i think -- does that make sense to you? it's just so off. >> it's very off. let me just say this. when you think about crime going down, i think that's a good sign. but when you see the discontent from african americans who are middle class, upper middle class, working class, they have

the same view and they're different from whites. whites are saying my community is protected and police are doing a good job. blacks, regardless of class, are saying my community is not protected. we have to look at that to understand why are so many people doing these surveys. african-americans are saying we are not in the year 2015 happy with the late race is being considered by law enforcement. when i say law enforcement, i'm talking about rural areas, all the suburbs, all of these places. and i think that, to me, has to be the essence of what we need to take a look at to understand why are so many people when things are going down in crime why are so many people discontent because of their race. and i think that's what you're able to see. >> thank you. >> we have policies operating in

disconnect from each other -- where crime has gone down arrests go up. especially arrests for small amounts of marijuana possessions. lawmakers, especially at the state level, our locks into the war on drugs mentality. just as you point out, that incarceration, the over incarceration, especially the war on drugs, has had a huge impact on the african-american community. that is the source of much discontent with policing and people out there on the streets. you can see the symbols of our justice system. >> i have to say the word. and i'm not the angry black man that you think i am. that data is very significant. because the reality is that police are not making arrests on

marijuana. they're, in a sense, many cities are saying it's no longer a crime to have a small percentage of marijuana. what the police are doing, they're searching black men not just for marijuana, they're going in their pockets and the whole idea is that you're supposed to see the marijuana and everybody should be treated the same. there's a disparity right now in the whole idea of the marijuana search. and that to me is a problem. when you dig into the pockets and find weapons, some other kind of drugs, you can find a warrant that the person should be arrested. they're ignoring when whites are -- i do not use marijuana. they are ignoring when whites use marijuana oh, it's just a drug. i would look at what is going on with police stopping people for marijuana and searching people

who happen to be a different race. >> our next questioner is brian stevenson. >> i'd like to express my gratitude to panelists for your excellent testimony. just two quick short questions. are any of you aware of any data or analysis that's been done on the impact of implicit bias training within a particular department? and, in addition to that, any data analysis that's been done that you'd like to draw to our attention. on the impact of diversification efforts, and i don't mean just raw racial diversity. some of the more more complex and sophisticated and looks to get into communities that produce some of the highest rates of crime and recruit people who lived in those communities into the police department, anything that you

can points us to that might give us something to look at as we consider the need for implicit bias training or diversity. >> ok. i can handle the implicit bias question. i feel like we need much better metrics, actually, of the implicit bias training that's out there now. we can sort of talk about what those metrics might be. one metric might be, you know, simply looking at the attitudes after the training. so looking at self reported attitudes, there's a lot of research suggesting that explicit attitudes and implicit attitudes don't always correlate highly. you can look at implicit attitudes after training. again, i don't know that you expect that training to break associations people have between race and crime. so, i mean, what you might want to do is look at whether those associations are affecting behavior. you can then focus on just the

behavior. and one way to focus on behavior, one indication of the behavior might come from citizen complaints. but that metric seems to be too rough, you know. people don't always complain for a variety of reasons. they may be afraid of complaining. complaining might involve having greater police contact, which they're trying to avoid. there are lots of reasons why people don't complain. that is why i think the use of body camera footage might be good in this regard. you can use that footage to look at officers' behavior with the public pre-and-post training. after the training, do the interactions look different? are they more positive? are they using less disrespectful language.

that is probably the best metric to look at effectiveness. >> we only have six minutes more for questions. so we're going to have to go very quickly now. >> ok, on diversification i'm assuming you mean diversifying workforce among the police officers. well, there's abundant research and the difference in performance by white latino, and african-american officers is not that great. i learned more about policing. the way i explained that skin , color doesn't matter. policing is the quality of the department. if you have a bad department everybody thinks -- everybody sinks to a low level. if you have a good or a much better department, the performance of all officers

rises, regardless of race, ethnicity or gender. so we should have a short course with the police department who should represent the communities of the police and they should not violate. but the way to improve policing on the streets is on how the department is run. >> our next -- will you do it? >> i guess i was also thinking about the impact of the diversity within the department on this whole question of public trust. in building community relations. >> the other aspect of trust and confidence, and ferguson, the public looks at the department and they see a department that does not reflect the community. on that level, the diversity has an important message. in whether people are willing to trust the department to manage a problem like that depends on

what they look at and see. while i agree with what he set about individual officers, i think department level diversity carries a message that does allow for trust and confidence in difficult situations. >> our next questioner is roberto. >> i guess this is for professor tyler and any of the panelists. how do we get the opposing viewpoints to come together? there are two sides to every issue. i hear statements such as crime has gone down but incarceration rates have gone up. as if that could not be conceived as a direct correlation, maybe more criminals have been incarcerated and therefore crime has gone down. the issue is the mistrust, that is what we are going for. how do we get officers to buy into that? because we have perceptions.

there's trying across all races. we have perceptions that every stop is a driven by racial motivation. it may be because crying in an area is rampant and that is the demographic that lives in the area. how do we get past that stage to try and get the reality to a perception? >> well, i definitely think that the first point is to try to reeducate and retrain officers to think about a different goal that moves beyond enforcement to building stronger communities. one of the goals should be to think how am i building trust in the police and the community. in the long run, my job is to try to improve this community. that is the first thing. the other thing that hasn't been emphasized enough is benefits to officers. issues that constantly come up when we talk to officers are safety and health and well being.

we know that the style of policing that many police officers are engaged in is both dangerous and not good for them. it produces stress of working in a hostile community and dealing with antagonistic people. and i certainly think, for example, when i talked to unions, i emphasized the benefit to officers themselves of changing their style of policing. >> varies distinct. >> okay. this is for professor tyler. you talked about internal procedural justice and i could not agree with you more on that. can you talk about how we aproach improving internal procedural justice in a paramilitary structure? >> well, that is really the core issue. i would emphasize to police commanders that they benefit a lot by trying to institute a more fair decision making, a more fair treatment style within

their department. we find that officers do their jobs better. they are more willing to go beyond their job description and do extra things that help their department if they feel fairly treated and committed to the department. i think the bottom line argument is that police commanders will benefit more from this style of policing they have a lot to gain , from doing it. >> you don't find those two in conflict then? the paramilitary structure -- >> no. i think that there's no question that the traditional paramilitary structure doesn't promote these ideas. on the other hand, i don't think that there's any reason we can't change the structure of police departments to make these ideas more important and still preserve the gains of traditional policing. >> >> connie rice, if you can be quick? >> i probably cannot. [laughter]

>> thank this terrific panel. we are going to take a five-minute break and come back promptly in five minutes. >> the president has asked the task force to report to him with his findings and recommendations by march 2. the task force's next scheduled public hearing is wednesday. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> the house gavels in at noon eastern. no votes are scheduled, with the house expected to adjourn late afternoon in preparation for the state of the union. the senate gavels in at 10:00 a.m. eastern.

senators will debate the keystone pipeline with votes on amendments later in the afternoon p watch the house on c-span and the senate on c-span2. this morning on c-span, governor chris christie delivers the new jersey state of the state address. a followed by governor jay inslee delivering the washington state of the state address. live at 7:00 a.m., "washington journal" looks at houston's tax reform proposal. the heritage foundation hosts a discussion on judicial elections and campaign finance laws as the spring court hears a state can bar judicial candidates from soliciting campaign funds. live on c-span.

later, the european union representative for foreign policy is in washington to speak about transatlantic relations and the recent terror attacks in paris. live from the brookings institution at 2:45 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> tonight, president obama delivers his state of the union address. live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern. including the speech, the gop response delivered by joni ernst, and your reaction through open phones on c-span and c-span radio. on c-span2 watch the speech and congressional reaction from statuary hall at the u.s. capitol. live on c-span c-span2 c-span radio and c-span.org. >> during his state of the state address, new jersey governor

chris christie spoke about new investments in his estate in his work with bipartisan groups to accomplish progress like the rebuilding of the city of camden. the governor spoke from the statehouse in trenton. this is 45 minutes. [applause]

[applause]

[applause] >> thank you.

>> thank you very much. >> mr. speaker, mr. senate president, lieutenant governor guadagno, former governors members of the legislature honorable members of the supreme court, family and friends and citizens of the state of new jersey -- i come before you, as required by the state constitution, to report on the condition of our state. the state of our state continues to get better. new jersey is better off than it was last year at this time, and it is certainly far better off than it was just five years ago.

while many first years of a second term show a hangover from the campaign and its partisanship, we together have fought through that. and have real accomplishments to show for that action in 2014. in a year with plenty of politics from some overly partisan corners of this chamber, new jersey has made progress -- growing our economy, creating jobs, reforming our criminal justice system, and improving some of our most challenged cities -- like the city of camden. we've done it because a majority of us care more about our state and new jersey's middle class than we do about scoring partisan political points. since last january, the total number of people employed in new jersey has grown by over 90,000. and the number of unemployed has dropped by nearly 30,000. we recorded our 5th consecutive

year of private sector job growth, and the unemployment rate continues to steadily go down. we have attracted and retained companies -- from subaru usa to the philadelphia 76ers to sandoz. we have grown our economy and more people are working, more people are supporting their families and more people today are knowing the power of going to work every day in new jersey today than one year ago. that is good news for new jersey's families. [applause] we have done this while holding the line on government spending and government employment. we also extended the successful cap on a key driver of property tax growth. and we passed real criminal justice reform in new jersey.

this bipartisan reform of the bail system will help keep violent offenders off the streets and give non-violent offenders who often sit in jail because they can't afford bail a chance to reclaim their lives. this is good for public safety. this is good for families. and this is good for new jersey. [applause] now, despite this progress despite so much evidence of an improving new jersey, it has become fashionable in some quarters to run down our state. i get it -- that's politics. but let's be clear. our growth in this past year has been part of a trend. a trend that began five years ago. it is easy to forget where we were and how far we have come.

five years ago, the unemployment rate was 9.7%. over 440,000 new jerseyans were out of work. today, the unemployment rate is 6.4%. we have cut unemployment by over one third in the last 5 years. and that is good for the new jersey families who now are working. [applause] and we have created over 150,000 private sector jobs in new jersey in five short years. five years ago, we faced massive consecutive budget deficits -- $2 billion for fiscal year 2010 and a projected $11 billion the fiscal year 2011 on a budget of only $29 billion. we fixed it by making hard choices, the way middle class families in new jersey have to do it in their homes.

today, we have balanced five budgets in a row. and together we will balance a sixth in a row this year. and we didn't do it the washington way, by raising taxes. we did it by cutting spending, shrinking government, and by fundamentally reforming the way government operates. this administration believes today -- and has always believed -- that new jersey and america will be a better place for middle class families when we shrink the size of government at every level. [applause] let's remember, back then, state spending had grown by 56% in the years from 2001 to 2008. today, discretionary spending in our state budget is $2.5 billion

below what we spent in fiscal year 2008. that is fiscal restraint. [applause] back then, the size of government was out of control. today, the number of state government employees is 8,500 lower than it was five years ago without one layoff at the state government level. that is prudent management of the state government workforce. [applause] back then, new jersey's highest in the nation property taxes had increased more than 70% in ten years. we averaged a 7% growth in property taxes per year. every year for 10 years. today, we have had four years of less than 2% annual property tax growth. now, that is because of the property tax cap we passed

together. it is working. it is continuing to work for the people of new jersey. this is a bipartisan achievement by everyone in this chamber. [applause] we also came together this year to extend the reforms of interest arbitration awards. this act has continued to make property tax control possible. in these past five years, we have delivered needed tax relief to small businesses. the $2.3 billion small business tax relief that we continue to phase in is improving new jersey's business climate and making our state more competitive. that approach is explicit in the sweeping, bipartisan changes that we made to new jersey's economic incentive programs. i want to congratulate you -- we have streamlined these incentives. and we have better targeted them to areas of our state that need this investment the most.

and the verdict is in -- the early returns from the economic opportunity act show that it is working to attract and retain businesses in key parts of our state. in total, those pro-growth policies and streamlined economic development efforts have brought in over $12 billion dollars of new public and private investment in new jersey in these last five years. the fact is that, the deeper they look, the more businesses like what they see. from forbes media to vf sportswear, from wenner bread to bayer health care, companies have chosen new jersey as a home for expansion. we have assets that many other states just cannot match. a highly educated work force, a world class transportation network, proximity to large markets, the shore. new jersey has so many attractions. we are america's number two state in biotechnology, number four in per capita income, number three in the use of solar power, and in the top ten in

data centers across this country. the results of this past year's survey by the new jersey business & industry association said it best. "overall", the bia said, "our members believe the state is continuing to move in the right direction. things are looking good for small business in 2015." now, i know that many of you in this room believe that income tax increases are the way to go. so yes, sometimes we will simply have to disagree. i have vetoed four income tax increases passed by this body. and make no mistake -- i will veto any more income tax increases that come before me. [applause]

and i will do it for one simple reason -- the higher our taxes are, the fewer people and businesses will come to new jersey and the more who will consider leaving. raising taxes is the old trenton way, and it didn't work. taxes were raised 115 times in the eight years before 2010. people and businesses in turn didn't support them and left our state. between 2004 and 2008 the departure of wealth, investment, and income was staggering -- some $70 billion left the state. we have begun a new direction and we need to go further, not reverse course. because despite all our progress, we have more to do. we have to open our ears and listen to our people. open our eyes and see what is happening around us.

new jersey just lost mercedes benz usa to the state of georgia. mercedes, in new jersey since the early 1970's, is leaving for a very simple reason -- it costs less to do business in georgia than it does in new jersey. don't take my word for it -- the leaders of mercedes said it themselves. as they announced their departure. our economic incentive laws help -- but lower taxes are better. we will not win the fight to keep and create good paying jobs for our middle class families in new jersey unless we lower taxes. yet i cannot make this a reality alone. it is you, and only you, the state legislature, who can lower taxes further and make new jersey more prosperous for our middle class families and their children.

i urge the legislature today to open your eyes and ears to the lessons of mercedes' departure and to act now to lower taxes and prevent another such departure and the effects it has for middle-class families in this state. [applause] we have also done much in the past five years to reform our education system. for the first time in 100 years, we came together to reform tenure, so that failing teachers can be removed from the classroom. for the first time, we brought the concept of performance-based pay to schools in our largest city, newark -- so that we can pay the best teachers more.

we've reformed and re-energized public education in camden under the leadership of paymon rouhanifard, a cooperative school advisory board and a supportive mayor and council. we have expanded charter schools throughout the state. and together we have enacted urban hope legislation to create renaissance schools in our highest risk districts. finally, for four years in a row, we've provided a record amount in aid to our public schools -- over $11.9 billion in the current fiscal year. but on this, we cannot and should not rest. more school reform is needed. a great first step would be to listen to the leadership of senator kaine and pass the opportunity scholarship act, to give parents a choice of a school that meets their child's needs. [applause]

let's give families an alternative to chronically failing neighborhood schools. let's give families an alternative to chronically failing neighborhood schools. let's keep driving for better outcomes. let's give parents and students more choice. at its heart, education is about realizing the potential of every individual. in these past two years, you've joined me in applying this principle to those who face

addiction. in this last year, we expanded the mandatory drug court program you helped me enact into four new counties, building on those in which courts were established immediately after the law's enactment in 2013. i have a simple view of this. drug addiction is a disease. it can happen to anyone, from any station in life. and it can be treated. most importantly, every life is an individual gift from god and no life is disposable. we have an obligation to help people reclaim their lives. and if we have the tools to help those with this disease to save their own lives, we should use

them. requiring mandatory treatment instead of prison for non-violent drug offenders is only one step -- but an important one. treatment is the path to saving lives, and for as long as i am governor of new jersey treatment will be mandatory in our system and i will not yield. [applause]