He was asked the question 5 – 8 times that I was present and Chief Koval points in every other direction and refuses to address the issue head on, what will change in the Police Department policies and procedures that lead to the 8:1 arrest ratio? I have a few suggestions.
According to the Race to Equity Report
First, lets be clear, this says “Arrest” not final disposition. “Arrest” happens solely within the police department’s purview. Nothing to do with charging decisions or sentencing or anythign else in the criminal justice system, this is before they get there. This is the arrest rates, which are determined by the police. If you include the others, you get statistics like “In 2011, a Dane County African American youth was 15 times more likely to spend time in the county’s secure detention program than a white youth. Statistics from the same year suggest that Dane County black youths were 25
times more likely to be sent to the state’s secure facility at Lincoln Hills than whites.”
There were multiple attempts to get the Chief to answer the question about what the POLICE DEPARTMENT was going to do, not the schools, or Dane County Human Services or everyone else under the sun. What is the POLICE DEPARTMENT going to do? At best, we get some vague statements, at worst, it was tap dancing like I’ve never seen before, puts Fred Astaire to shame. It’s almost like there is something to hide.
The question: When you attempt to address a disparity, what do you do different and what have you done to perpetuate the disparities? What role has the Madison Police Department played in the disparities in Dane County?
Answer: He talks about the selection process of the police department. (The same process that created the disparities.) He says that he can’t fix anything over night, they are looking at a whole bunch of stuff (no details) and they are asking community stakeholders what they can do, which is why he is here. (But there is no evidence that he is doing anything with what he hears.) He then blames the dialog, and asks who is speaking up for the victims. (Changes the subject.)
He asks the question again.
Answer: The talks about legislative initiatives at the state level. He looks at the big picture and only those things that he has control over. (The legislature, that is what he thinks he has control over? That seems to be the one thing that seems quite hopeless and something he has little to no control over.)
This answer includes nothing that will change in the policies or procedures that led to the 8:1 arrest ratios, that are much, much higher than the rest of Wisconsin and the United States.
Question: Blacks are 6% of the population and 50% of the population in jail, how does the community and the police address those disparities?
Answer: The report has been a rally cry for the community and police department and they are looking at how they can be part of the solution. (But no examples given.) He says that he is glad she said there are other factors at play like education, habitability, neighborhoods are being tasked, 50 – 65% of kids get free or reduced lunch and that is a recipe for disaster. He talks about hiring practices. He talks about the FBI making a statement on a controversial subject. He talks about cop culture, checks and balances and rogue cops. He says they also have to look at what is intrinsic in the way the police and unintended consequences. (But he doesn’t say what that might be.) He again changes the subject to victims. He says that if people aren’t being treated appropriately, he needs to know that. He says there will be a restorative peer court for misdemeanors. (But that is after people have been arrested at 8:1 ratios.) He says this is for first time offenders. This is a county funded grant. They will look at people “falling out of school”, if there are AODA issues or if they need to get a job. The community will decide what will be accountability. He talks about CCAP and how it impacts getting a job and going to school. He says people don’t look at how the cases are resolved, if it is dropped or there was just a fine. He says they are working on getting rid of dismissals and forfeitures.
Attempts 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 on the Southside
Question: Officers have discretion to decide who gets arrested, black people are arrested at a ratio of 8:1, who is accountable for that? How do we get equity in policing, why do we accept that we place more police in communities of color? The question has a whole lot in there, you should listen.
Answer: He says the 8:1 ratio in the racial disparities report, he suggests that if you look at where policing is occurring, for 17 – 26 year olds, predominantly people of color, neighborhoods don’t make the top 10 or the top 25. The top 10 places are East Towne and West Towne malls, east and west transfer points, 4 high schools and 2 Walmarts. They go there because they are called there by third parties. Once they arrive, they have to find a basis to arrest. He says when you look at where people call home, they are living in the neighborhoods. They might be over-policed but not in the neighborhoods. He talks about there only being 4 cops from 11pm – 4 am. From 3 – 11pm there are 7. (There are 20 cops in the room) They talk about where the district covers (West High to Monona). He says at any given time, police can get tied up and they might have to convey someone to Oshkosh, he says if he had double the workforce, they still couldn’t field the volume of calls they get. He says they have a role, they do more training than the state requires, he talks about their extra training. (The same training that let to the 8:1 ratios) He talks about Project Innocence and how people are misidentified and the police role in that and the 4 hours of training they did on that. He says when there is poverty, education failing youth, joblessness and housing problems, people are stacked upon people in areas that are target rich for problems. He says they will run the rogues out of Dodge, but they need to look at systemic problems, he says they have to look at alternatives to ticket or arrest. (But no specifics or details or indication of how people can have input into that process, if there is one.)
Question: This is a structural issues, what structural changes to you propose?
Answer: He says that we hear alot about who gets arrested, but he feels he needs to speak up for victims. (Changes the subject.) He asks which cases are not as important as others? Burglaries are invasive, which crimes? If you give me a list, we can have an adult dialogue about that. He says he thinks they should start with possession of drugs, but its not popular. They are the gatekeepers, but their word, report and testimony won’t be prosecuted unless probable cause. There is a lot going on besides the police. He talks about the restorative justice court again. (After the police make the arrest.) He goes into a diatribe about stealing to eat or because you are homeless. He talk about the court, how there won’t be a CCAP record, etc. (This is slightly aggravating as CCAP doesn’t record arrests, only once the D.A. charges, but he makes it sound like arrests are entered.) He says that if the police a culpable, he is not absolving them, they have to own what they create, but beyond what they are doing or not doing, there are alot of other issues and positive things happening. (Again, no details about what he might change or do differently.) He talks about good deeds his officers does. He says it is easier to look at what is inappropriate, shows wrongdoing and puts police in a bad light. He says any group 95% are meeting and exceeding standards which we hold dear and there is probably 3 – 5% that all the negativity can generate. He talks about cops that take care of cops. (I am unclear, are the 3 – 5% responsible for all the arrests?) He says they don’t have a cancerous incideous culture in Madison. He doesn’t care how the community defines his legacy, but he cares about the legacy of the police department and he will defend it. He has feet of clay, will make mistakes, maybe he will have an intensive word or phrase, he will own that. He talks about court cases that get litigated for years and how proud his is of the police department.
At this point I blurt out, that he hasn’t answer the question. He says that he talked about restorative court. I tell him that doesn’t address what the police will do, what will be different than what led to the disparities in the first place. He talks about how they try to be relational, and that they are trying.
More people jump in and try to ask the question again. You should listen to the end of the video.
I ask what they are going to do different. He says he doesn’t have to respond. That it just isn’t the answer I want to hear. “It is what it is, Brenda.”
The audience persists, and tries again. Twice. The person asks what, within what the police have control over, what policies and procedures assisted in those 8:1 disparities. It was a two part question.
Lights go out. Not kidding. He talks about the quality of the contacts in the neighborhood. He talks about the “animated” concern about body cameras, he was surprised he didn’t hear about that tonight. He says people think cameras mean transparency. He credits Young Gifted and Black with saying that if you have transparency, you don’t have accountability. He says that recording cops behaving badly, doesn’t get to it, we want them to be accountable. He says that he thinks it is good that he cops here are hearing people’s comments and criticisms and they have to look at if they are part of the problem. He says they couldn’t be here in uniform and not be impacted by the conversations today. He didn’t expect to achieve measurable from the forum.
A women interrupts and says that he didn’t address the policies and procedures. He says there is no racial profiling, equal protection of the laws, etc. She says that the numbers don’t reflect that. He moves on.
I’m very frustrated. I saw no commitment to change. No commitment to do anything different. I see a police department that thinks there is nothing wrong with anything they do. And quite frankly, I think they are unwilling to openly look at the issues. They point their fingers in every direction but their own, say some nice empty words from time to time and then move on.
In the end, when I look at what Police Chief Mike Koval said would change, the answer is simple. Nothing.
My suggestions:
A publicly (Common Council or Mayoral) appointed committee that looks at what is going on, get statistics, looks at issues the community has raised, asks questions, and makes recommendations about procedures and policies that could be changed. There has to be a look at the systemic issues – this isn’t about rogue cops or nice people, this is about systems that are producing these ratios.
The is complicated because police oversight is in three different places. The Police and Fire Commission hires and fires police. The council sets their budget. The Public Safety Review Board is supposed to be the community oversight. If the last body was doing their job, this would all be done there, but they have been neutered and are essentially useless. Admittedly they are advisory, but the only pressure that can put on the police department is either public pressure or budgetary – and they ALWAYS get their budget, always. No one wants to be soft on crime. So, all we have left is public pressure and I think an official city committee that looks at this is not too much to ask, in fact, it’s the least they can do.
Here’s the three very raw forums that are done. I hadn’t intended these to be for public consumption and I didn’t even shoot most of the video in the downtown one, thanks to Cristina Lor for the assist.
