Community Policing and Body Camera Report and Recommendations

As presented to the EOC . . . which recommended that they needed more information before making a final recommendation on body cameras and did not accept the report of the committee.

The meeting was held in the Community Room of the Police Department. It was noticed to be a joint meeting with the Public Safety Review Committee, but only one member showed up. No one from the police department was there. No one from the ad hoc committee was there to report on their work. Lucia Nunez, the staff to the EOC served on the ad hoc committee and provided more information. There was actually two items here in this post, the first is the report from the YWCA and then the second was the report of the ad hoc committee that heard this report and then took information on some other reports as well and recommended no on body cameras.

I’ve been interested in hearing more about the YWCA report and the ad hoc committee work, beyond what I can see in the minutes from 3 meetings, so I came to hear the presentation. I typed as fast as I could, but Coleen talks fast! 🙂 This is essentially live blogged and slightly fixed this morning.

Presentation on YWCA Report
Here is their full report – which was emailed to committee members during the meeting.

Colleen Butler, Racial Justice Coordinator for the YWCA, she was not the person who directly worked within the focus groups, Jacqueline Boggess was the facilitator. They were directed to do focus groups through the resolution and they had a facilitator who was a person of color instead of her, but she is the logistical coordinator. She has a powerpoint she can send, but technology didn’t cooperate. Apparently, they got the report yesterday, but I didn’t see it attached to the agenda. She says the report is a report about what people said. She and the facilitator have been on both ends of the spectrum and represents the people. They went to committees that already existed and already knew each other so that they would speak more freely. 100 Black Men, Latino Youth Group, Nehemiah Group, Freedom Inc, LGBTQ meeting on campus, Man-up (recently incarcerated/Neahmiah), Operation Fresh Start, 3rd ST, MUM, UNIDOS and Urban League. They hosted meetings, they spoke with over 150 members of the community. Generally they found that at the beginning the tone was different and it shifted. At first they thought it was ok, not strong pro-body camera. Through the conversation, there was a stronger feeling that it was not the solution. They didn’t think it would improve their own safety or positive relationships with the police. Each focus group started by asking about what people thought about body cameras. There was a lot of talk about people’s feelings about policing in their neighborhoods. People were afraid police officers would manipulate the devices, that they could turn them off and on and that it could be modified later. The thought it was a false sense of security, this is not the solution to racial disparities and transparency with the police, privacy issues were to a lesser degree discussed. They also met with city departments and it is true, information may be redacted. They are worried that this is not a panacea and they want real change. The white participants tended to feel more concerned about privacy – they will be even more scared to fight for their rights (to get their papers). There were concerns about what happens to the tapes afterwards. Will they be used against people for undocumented, on paper, owe child support, could it lead to circumstances that they get into trouble when they call for help. They don’t trust the police. There was a strong sense of fear – the community is afraid of the police because the police are afraid of them. They are worried about escalation of situations. They feel like police already have too much power and it won’t help. They felt that they would be more likely to be used against them to help them. The racial and profiling issues were prevalent. Every focus group was most worried in the African American community and how that will then go to other communities. In the Latino groups there were language, driving and documentation issues. They were afraid of the information being used by ICE. They also were concerned about when something traumatic happens, the police come and might have high school level Spanish and couldn’t interact with people who were native speakers and that they couldn’t actually speak Spanish. Driving and moving violations were a big concern and they were afraid to drive in particular neighborhoods and to drive over boundaries where municipalities change (Fitchburg, Town). They talk alot about ticket quotas and there is a feeling that the 3rd week of the month is an issue. In African American groups they found that because they are so disproportionately impacted they were already likely to be on supervision and had issues that they could be used to reincarcerate people. In the LGBTQ community there was more concern about privacy, especially for children. There was also a comment about positive relations with specific officers they had good experiences with and who they had respect for – that could be models for the community, but the positive experiences gave trust that when undermined it was detrimental to the police. There were also other good comments and the police are vulnerable too, but they felt that they were more likely to be victims than have a beneficial interaction. If you don’t trust the police, how do you trust that the videos will be helpful. The recommendations from the focus groups included: money should to go training to work with community, we need more cultural competence and we need to train community members what is legal and what is not. Other themes were that they would like to ban racial profiling and have protections against it. The committee had officers and they said they are starting to do this. This was not just about Madison police, it was about police in general. They also talked about mental health and the need to have them as primary or co-responders. They felt they should use minimal force, carry nonlethal weapons and deescalate. They talked about warrants and fines. They want officers to not come to events with guns, come in a t-shirt and casual clothing, no guns. When you come to events with guns you send the wrong message. They also want them to go through racial bias training and testing and make sure that it is used in hiring. They also want a communications strategy. They felt good about being heard, but don’t like it if something doesn’t change. Community advisory board, community ambassadors were suggested.

Questions on YWCA Report
John Quinlan talks about the “privacy” issue and that was a theme throughout about how will this be used later. Alot of it was about privacy. Butler says the word was only in the mixed group – it impacted every group, it was more concrete with people of color but more about rights with white people. Lower income people and people of color don’t even feel like they have rights, they were more concerned about concrete things.

Quinlan said they should use Madison 365, Madison Times, Hues, etc. The traditional media isn’t representative and they have made some mis-steps.

Zach Madden brings up the video has been used a lot as video evidence and it hasn’t made a difference. Butler says yes, that came up and they felt that it wasn’t a feeling that the video would help.

Moriah Grace – did you talk to the police about having a gun at an event, are these off duty cops? Don’t they have to keep their belts on? Butler says she doesn’t think they are off duty. This did seem like a tangible thing that they could do.

Kira Stewart – They are out of rotation but on duty. They don’t respond to calls during that time.

Bill Fetty asks about if this was funded from city funds? Butler says yes. Lucia Nunez says that Percy Brown and Lucia Nunez were on the group. Sean Saiz asked if anyone from EOC attended. Percy didn’t attend the meetings. Fetty asks about funds that are returned to the police department and where they will go. Butler says that so far they have not received any funds. Fetty is pointing out that this wasn’t the funding for camera study. This is different. Fetty says that if cameras aren’t the solution, where does that other money go?

Fetty asks what to be done about the trust issue. Butler says they have heard the feedback, but there is no planned action. Fetty asks if this will be the piece that gets through to the police, that makes them understand we are afraid, scared of them and don’t trust them. Is this a building block that will make change happen. Butler says that is hard to answer, people felt good about being heard and that the process was meaningful. We shared their specific words. People felt good about that and that could be a building block,listening and building relationships. Now is a difficult time because the police feel under attack, its a difficult time to give recommendations about how to do things differently. She doesn’t know if it will lead to changes, its good the policy is under review and what changes might be made. Part of the reason video cameras are not helpful is if Eric Garner is choked on camera and nothing happens, this is not helpful. There is a policy issue.s In order for people to feel like their input was heard, something has to change.

Stewart talks about Rahm Enauael and Chicago and police being afraid of cell phones and cameras and why are they afraid of that?

Fetty says they should be uncomfortable, there is no right time to be criticized, he is not worried about their comfort level and regaining community trust. Butler says their comfort level is making it hard for them to listen. How can we bring this feedback so it transforms. This was a gift and we should appreciate that people talked about how they actually feel, we should realize how serious this is, but she is not sure this is a gift right now. Fetty thinks this is an excellent point about it being a gift and we should repeat that.

Zach Madden asks what policies are being reviewed? Butler says that the mayor’s office has a policy review board, mostly made up of community members and they asked the facilitator and members of this task force to serve on that committee. Saiz says they don’t meet until tomorrow. Lucia Nunez says that they meet tomorrow, it is their last meeting, and some will continue on, Veronica Lazo and Tom Brown want to continue, but Nunez doesn’t know if they were chosen. Butler says that they just added Jackie Bogess to the committee.

John Quinlan asks about the crossing jurisdiction, the Town has a problem going back decades, is there a chance they can bring this to the county level, there is parallels between LGBTQ community and latino communities and trust. Can we broaden that. Butler says that she agrees, but she hopes we don’t shift the focus, because all departments have work to do. Butler is working with Colleen Clark at the county level and they have been doing a lot of trainings. Butler says that sometimes officers don’t see where their sphere of influence is and they all can have an impact.

Quinlan asks about privacy, is that about outing people? Butler says that was one piece. Also no sense of trust and safety and they feel marginalized and feel like it could be used against them, what would happen to make them more vulnerable.

Saiz asks about how the committee voted by sex and race? He says that AA males voted for body cameras, that is very interesting given who is impacted by police violence. That should be mentioned in all fairness. Butler says one of the challenges is that the process was that the ad hoc committee didn’t even exist before the ad hoc committee was formed and the focus groups were done before the group met. He asks if they saw the report, Butler wasn’t sure. Butler says they came in with preconceived issues. She says that the African American men in the groups did not agree with the 2 votes.

Moriah Grace asks about people with disabilities and a run in with the police. Deaf person or other issues, were accommodations made? She doesn’t thing that was addressed.

Adam Brabender – was there any disabled people on the committees? Lucia Nunez says no, not on the ad hoc committee. No visible or no one who disclosed.

Butler has to go.

Fetty asks if there is any other discussion?

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AD HOC COMMITTEE
The ad hoc committee voted no on body worn cameras, 5 – 2 with 2 abstentions and they had this report from the YWCA and other information. Here is their report on body cameras.

Saiz had the focus group report and saw it. Yes, Jackie did the presentation and they had 3 other reports, one by a national consultant by DOJ and talked about issues in implementing the changes, a report about implementing the program with the police and companies on that committee. The most compelling was the DOJ report about not implementing the cameras without talking to community and having legal issues resolved about turning on and off the cameras and carefully thinking about the cost. To her, based on the report, she voted no. Others voted no based on this report. Saiz asks about the people who voted yes, Nunez says they didn’t elaborate. Police and Fire abstained, no matter how they vote it will be difficult.

Stewart then they should have been non-voting members. Someone with a disability or someone in this room could have been present. “Its just crazy”

Quinlan asks about the other revelation about the other info beyond body cams that was gathered. Nunez says that is why a few members will join the policy group. Their charge was limited, yes or no on body cameras. Quinlan asks about the other group. Excessive force, training and all those other policies will be looked at, she hasn’t seen the info and hopes to get it at her meeting tomorrow. Quinlan asks if a commissioner could be on it. Either Saiz or Fetty is on it.

Grace says that there is nothing we can do about this – but could we have people with different ability. Nunez says to call the mayors office and the alders. Call Rebbecca Kemble.

Fetty asks Brenda to make sure Z! knows about this.

Stewart says if they already voted, what are we accepting. Nunez says recommendation to vote no.

Charles McDowell says that they got various reports, were there any reports of successful jurisdiction. Nunuz says there were 3 studies in the DOJ, 2 in AZ and 1 in CA. Those are the only studies so far, to look at if they are changing the number of complaints. The majority are in England and other countries, they don’t have weapons and the same dynamics as we have in this country. There are tow few studies to see if this move the needle one way or the other. Will it enhance transparency, we don’t have that answer, will it reduce complaints, we don’t know, the studies aren’t conclusive and haven’t been used long enough. He says that we don’t want to close the door at this point, we want to revisit this with more data in the future. He says that the data and fear that people have and the perception that police ticket at certain times, why can’t we ask for the data on the tickets in the 3rd week of every month. He says if we look at data we can start moving towards solutions, the speculation is driving people crazy.

Adam Brabender says in Europe they don’t carry weapons. Nunez says in England they don’t have guns, but she is not an expert. Fetty says they are not issued sidearms, they are kept locked up. He says that is surprising. Shows you how far we have to go.

Zach Madden moves to accept the report and recommendations.

Stewart says that she is uncomfortable voting without data and the quota thing she thought was a myth, that is what your parents said, it is easy to get info on. There has been video in cruisers for years, even data around that and how effective that is – right now, she would be voting on emotion and what was reported on and she isn’t comfortable. Nunez says yes you are voting on the recommendations to vote, you could accept the report but we want more data. Or you don’t and want more data. Staff says that the common council will then receive that recommendation and then the cc can do what they want.

Quinlan says that he is ambivalent, he isn’t crazy about cameras and has concerns about it being a panacea, he is wondering if they could table it? Fetty says it won’t impact council in the long run. Nunez says CC will get the report at the next meeting, next week. One member of the Public Safety Committee is here, they didn’t have quorum. Fetty says they can table, Fetty says it might be more effective to say yes or no and why. He says that we should respect the vote on the commission and they have a member on the next agenda.

Quinlan says there may be enough ambivalence to vote against the recommendation, that they want more information or vote to respect the work of the group – his experience is that the message they send with the vote doesn’t get conveyed. Fetty says that it is customary practice to accept a report done by another committee. Madden says that if they vote against it might signal they are for body cameras.

Nunez says it is on the agenda for Tuesday, you are the lead agency, its item 37.

4 nos (Saiz, Quinlan, McDowell, Stewart), 2 yeses (Madden, Brabender) and one abstention (Grace), Fetty doesn’t vote as the chair – motion fails.

Lots of procedural talk . . .

Grace makes a motion to say that more data is needed before the decision for body cameras is made on implementing body cameras. Seconded.

Lots more procedural talk . . .

They are not recommending for or against accepting the recommendations, but they want more info.

They want it on another agenda as a topic, but the report can go to the council with their recommendations.