Seattle Outreach Report 01-24-14

Community Police Commission
Community Outreach Report
January 2014
Our city. Our safety. Our police. Better together.
In Appreciation of Kip Tokuda

The Community Police Commission is pleased to issue this Community Engagement Report, with thanks to all responsible for it. The community engagement activities that resulted in this report were inspired in large measure by the vision of our late Commissioner Kip Tokuda. A highly respected former state legislator for the 37th district, a beloved community leader, and a lifelong resident of Seattle, Kip served the people of Seattle and Washington with heart, dedication, and wisdom. He was a skilled and committed advocate for justice and fairness, and for public policies that reected these values. We remember Kip and his thoughtful counsel and contributions to the Community Police Commission with gratitude.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
...........................................................
I. The Seattle Community Police Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 II. The 2013 Community Outreach Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Purpose.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Focus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Structure.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
III. Outreach Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Outreach Overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Survey Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Introduction Totals Demographics Community Perceptions and Experience Steps To Improve SPD Performance Summary/Conclusions Key Themes from Community Meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
IV. Current Status and Next Steps
..........................................
32
Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
A. Partners and Conveners Coordinating Organizations Targeted Populations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Community Meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C. Collateral Material. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Brochure Fact Sheet PowerPoint Policy Overviews Questionnaire D. Survey Tool. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E. Languages Spoken in Homes of Survey Respondents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F. Key Themes Matrix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
35 39 45
51 57 59
Community Outreach Report | January 2014
Core values in engaging the community

Partnership driven We all own the problem and the solution Meaningful involvement CPC will be informed by community input Inclusiveness Engage all stakeholders Accountability and Transparency Proof that input matters
Seattle Community Police Commission
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
The Seattle Community Police Commission and Community Engagement
In 2012 the City of Seattle entered into a Settlement Agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to reform the Seattle Police Department (SPD) after the DOJ reported a pattern or practice of constitutional violations by SPD. The Settlement Agreement called for the creation of the Seattle Community Police Commission (CPC), whose members represent a broad range of community perspectives and who are charged with providing community input on the police department reform process and reform proposals. The CPC is responsible for engaging Seattles diverse communities to understand and represent their viewpoints, and to give them a voice and stake in improving police services.
Lisa Daugaard, Co-Chair, Diane Narasaki, Co-Chair, Claudia DAllegri, Bill Hobson, Jay Hollingsworth, Kate Joncas, Joseph Kessler Tina Podlodowski, Marcel Purnell, Jennifer Shaw, Kevin Stuckey, Rev. Harriett Walden, Rev. Aaron Williams
The CPCs rst community outreach activity was conducted during October 2013. A major focus of this community outreach effort was to obtain feedback on the CPCs draft policy recommendations related to bias-free policing, stops and detentions, use of force, and in-car video recordings. This feedback was included in the CPC report on its policy recommendations issued November 15, 2013. During the 2013 outreach, the CPC also sought community perspectives about the reform process in general, the role of the CPC, experience with the police, and guidance for future community engagement activities.
The level of community participation was remarkable. Those who took part expressed an overwhelming appreciation for being asked to participate and a high interest in having future opportunities for ongoing discussions. Nevertheless, the time constraints of the process presented many challenges and prevented some important partner organizations and constituencies from participating fully. The timeframe also contributed to some skepticism that community feedback would meaningfully inuence nal policies and reforms adopted by SPD.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Participants made clear that public condence in the reform process will ultimately depend on tangible evidence of progress. An ongoing dialogue with the community is needed and should include reports on progress made, including the extent to which adopted policies incorporate the CPC recommendations; information on how community input inuenced nal policies and reform efforts in general; hard
Ofce, the Seattle Police Monitor Team, the Seattle City Attorneys Ofce, SPD (especially the Compliance team and Audit, Policy and Review staff), the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission, the Ofce of Professional Accountability Auditor, and the Seattle Human Rights Commission. We look forward to future collaborations as we continue our work.
During October 2013, the CPC and its partners and supporters brought together more than 3,400 community members at more than 150 meetings.
data tracking police practices; and results of annual community surveys.
Creating change that will endure

What do we want to change?
Who is participating?
The City of Seattle established the Community Police Commission (CPC) to provide community input on proposed Seattle Police Department (SPD) reforms. The CPC was mandated under a memorandum of understanding between the City and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) which details work to be done over three years to ensure bias-free policing and address the past use of excessive force. The CPC plays a key role in the reform efforts. The CPCs charge is to represent a broad range of community perspectives and to reach out and engage communities directly, to get critical feedback, and to then recommend changes to SPD policies and practices. It gives community members a voice and stake in the reform process. The CPC is depending on community involvement over the long haulcommunity perspective is needed in the short-term on suggested changes, but we also need to know if changes SPD makes really work. CPC will foster that dialogue over time which CPC believes will also build trust and strengthen community-police relations. CPC recommendations are intended to: Ensure police services comply with the Constitution, and the laws of Washington and the United States Increase the effectiveness of the police accountability system Promote public confidence in SPD
The CPC will arrange meetings with a wide range of community and faith organizations, neighborhood and youth groups, and with key partner agencies to talk about possible reforms. Many discussions will be sponsored by community partners engaged by the CPC to gather critical insight from communities particularly affected by police practices. Meaningful conversations with Seattles diverse communities and institutional stakeholders are essential.
Participants also believed the public is eager for information about their rights, how to le complaints, how the police accountability system works, and the reform L P Sidee ayaan aan th no omta process. yo Chng ti o Pa m c kik s h ing l ga ng n n an ng Waa la C maqli doonaa g g iyo he ta u samaynaa ng ki ga n ca qu gawa ng to bo v, v iu n s, atlga u o sse codkaada, waxayna ku n nn s th s m m ga a nwa e n s khc bi p y r The CPC will continue to seek ay i? ? c ito ng isbaddal? pa gb su a ab . t gb s ag yeelan doontaa saamayn! ! o o! ? a m b a re go a ? ch u ? sc E l io il b w ! e m community perspectives by a ic a stw op e c y r vo n ill You in,i it . d a n ci a n ife ard hem ! re ar la de be for sponsoring opportunities arc differenc make a dialogue on ways to improve community-police relations and provide community views on specic policy matters.
g ti tin v cc cuc long din kinatawa ng CPC na n ng encias CPC gp g sahp c ngh cc i iyong bukas sa publiko 4-4749 sugertle, WA 9812 t chc trongCPC pangkat CPC ,o vi nhm o enve OCPC@seattl upang s CPC Hel macluumaad ku saabsan shirarka 94749, Seat at xt www.seattle. CPC CPC s Nala sooCPC xariir is wakiilada CPC ula kulmaan suriin e.gov ng cng , bin ang mga 4 mga 206-233-266 xut mag-alo ca qu v, k ideya katitikan ng OCPC@seattle.gov kung paano kin v cch ce comentario o problemas ng pagpupu v xem su Reali www.seattle. tema CPC ee u furan dadweynaha iyo iri kooxdaada, s tip namin long. bn cuc hp. ama si aad u soo jeedisid krado mahusay na mas . gov/policecommission: gov/policeco chng ti hoc (o enve cc cng maabot angcn relac ionadas con ra investigar .) Xem xt mmission Suriin c th mga ng miyemb qoraalada laga sameyay shirarka. ti liu v ng komunidad. oa ku saabsan sida wanaagsan loolamga xariiri debe materyales ro tt hn. for sa ee ang lucrarse: www.seattle CPCns .gov/ por corre nhng tungkol la i chnh encia CPC 49). CPC xut thay Lin Cmo invo suggestio 4-47 listas ideque laga o suger sch. xubnaha bulshada. sa mga ipinapanukalang uldCPC pagbaba ntario Fiiri qoraalada sameyay talooyinka karo WA 9812 sho SPD h chng servidor de go come or prov patakaran. tission CPC Hon tt 9, Seattle, policecomm . men the ov en nuestro CPC ti 9474 tar Com that base ttle.g bng Box laga soo jeediyay isbaddalada. solici es and PO Inscr @sea cu hi trc ts Hi ng Sagutan ang or issu chng ti tros para men en OCPC cs noso tuyn ca Cnh St com isang online topi v cch ci con ttle, rena en(or mailCPC Nala soo xariir se Sea Makipa de se Cng ng CPC : la CPC 49, nque CPC g-ugnay sa CPC OCPC thin hot Dhamaystir suaalaha internetka ee ku la questionnaire tungkol de la 947 lved ca de Comu into n: de web SPD amin @sea Box nte a . invo Seattle SPD issio ng v look sitio comm ns to PO ttle.gov, al at acerc mi quan sa Guddiga Boliiska Bulshada Seattle Seattle representa paano Ingrese 206-233Commu h cng loo hagaajiyo dhaqanka 206-233-2664 erv ov/police papaghusayin ang kung How to be OCPC@seattle.gov, que un sugerir ideassaabsan los .seat Police ng. nity www il lists a a sida 2664 para suggestio tle.gsion . Commis otativ mga .seattle.g es nuestra llegad ov/police 4749). las OCPC@seattle.gov, 206-233-2664 s ema kasanay grupo www OCPC@ su ion 24PO an SPD iyo xariirka bulshada. sobre CPC Box seattle. at 94749, con www.seattle.gov/policecommiss esen comm rar ugnayan 981de la for Seattle, gov, 206-233-2664 mejo WA ission . inform.acin s CPC repr komunidad ng SPD. sa co Sign up .gov www.seattle.gov/policecommission WA 98124-4749 podemos r idea al pbli Obtenga nidad. to have cmo seattle to offe at www comu Hi ng www.seattle.gov/policecommission abiertas. ity tact de la site p, or bros ones de us OCPC@ tas mun Con reuni groumiem s web cam kt kim on: las minu issi reach com revise e to CPC t with your CPC y mee tle.gov, 206-233-2664 better tros Go onlin sot c hi icecomm OCPC@seat . SPD can we con nosoCom os .gov/pol howionad las reuniones u qu, cn unidad de ommission forrelac .gov/policec seattle www.seattle about CPC the . el Comunquese de la 64 g bng. to materiales rmation Revis e los para de Polica members 206-233-26 open estos . . Comisin propu Find infos which are ttle.gov, o mission iosutes min @sea camb conting ion OCPC com miss n policial. meeting review mee Seattle us tio ov/police de acci e Com tac tle.g plan and osed Polic Con ionar lic .seat ity prop pub -2664 www.sea Commun www nuestro cuest ttle ls about ttle.gov/ 206-233 . mejorar las le.gov, Sea materia Complete sion policecom eatt commis iones CPC Review nges. en lnea sobre cmo www.seattle.go relac mission C@s e www.seattle.gov/policecommission las 600 Fourth y OCP /police 600 nair Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 SPD v/polic stion Avenue, Seattle del 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, SPCbroc WA 98104 600 Fourth Avenue, policy cha ecommission ttle.gov que icas e prct Seattle, , WA hure090 . www.sea Traditional Chinese WA 98104Ammaankena. 98104 Waan isku icanahay. Somali www.seattle.gov/policecommission 513_VI.indd Magaaladena, Boliiskena, e an onlin 2-3 la comunidad Vietnames Tagalog con SPD s. e Complet to improve 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104SPCbrochure s. relation 090513_TL.indd Simplified Chinese SPCbrochure090513_TCH.indd . Mejor junto 2-3 . polica 2-3 about howand community ther www.seattle.gov/policecommission ra . . Ating lungsod. Ating . toge Nuest s . er dad. kaligtasan. seguri SPCbrochure090513_SO.indd 2-3 10/16/13 5:10 PM practice raBett Thnh ph Ating pulisya. Mas 98104 Nueste. . polic ca maganda 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA
CPC and partners in reform
waxaa la o magbigay C Mag-sig ng k nhn ng ng mga marka up sa email Nu suhestiy heliemai karaa oo iyo Maaa boliiska chng ch Sida looga qeybgalo: onkeliya ri lang mang kin bulshada Faalo ka bixi ama talo ka soonjeedi para listserv CPC sa mga paksa ng ng CPC l dapat ti listse sa OCPC@ yari ti a ible nhng ch o isyugp rvsiyasatin c san seattle. na hoc xut v ca chn totong kaligta pos ch OCPC thng gov mowduucyada ama arrimaha loo es ng . cn hoc g CPC th OCPC@seattl (o magpad @sea solo wada g ang e.gov t soan to xem ng ttle.g ng kapag Isku qor liiska emailka CPS, booga .iriso ala vn lica publik mga o. shaqeyaan. Truy cp Mag-onl xt (hoc gi en komento m CPC ov. magtutulung pb junt ine sa website baahan yahay in CPC wh at suhestiy CPC v ad CPC nn con cnh ng urid en an ang on sa PO th ng gp en n khi CPCtrc sa tuyn Box 94749, Seattle, qua n seg trang chn internetka OCPC@seattle.gov.adera pp . komu ajan www.se g nidad g bu in ha ti ti v vic attle.go trab (ama boostada ku soo dir faalada iyo at st WA ly v/police Our community a ch www web ca ca 98124-4 ang cn verd vi nh Seat on pulisy g commis n poli 749). n PO Box xut La gov/ ph CPC tle, la a. sion: y www.seattle. er. polic .seat WA Makipag i hp lm ca au. WA . 94749, Seattle, ad 9812 ecom 94749, Gal internetka, bogga CPC Box tle. sa amin OCPC@seattle.gov y com O Maghan talooyinka: PO Box eth 94749, Seattle, WA P 4-4749). unid mission: -ugnay ap ng imporma fet CPC gov/policeco sa Linupang mmission: syon c h vi chn The CPC needs your help to create a stronger, safer and more tungkol makipag (PO Box pulong ang mga www.seattle.gov/policecommission: la thng mga pagpupu Tm 98124-4749). . 98124-4749 e work tog sa CPC cuando publi
Paano sumali:
o How d ate we cre change?

polic True unity and the comm
Members of the CPC were appointed by the Mayor and conrmed by the City Council. They represent the diversity of Seattle and include people from communities of color, ethnic and faith communities, immigrant communities, the urban Indian community, the lesbian/gay/ bisexual/transgender community, civil rights advocates, the business community, individuals familiar with the challenges faced by those with mental illness or substance abuse issues, and youth. One member is from the Seattle Police Ofcers Guild and one is from the Seattle Police Management Association. CPC members live or work in all ve Seattle police precincts. The CPC works closely with other agencies to promote reform, develop policy recommendations and ensure accountability. Key partners include SPD and other agencies and departments of the City of Seattle, the Court-appointed Monitor who oversees the settlement agreement, and the DOJ. The CPC works independently of its partners and will incorporate community perspectives in its nal policy recommendations.
CPC members:
Claudia DAllegri Lisa Daugaard, Co-Chair Bill Hobson Jay Hollingsworth Kate Joncas Joseph Kessler Diane Narasaki, Co-Chair Tina Podlodowski Marcel Purnell Jennifer Shaw Kevin Stuckey Rev. Harriett Walden Rev. Aaron Williams
Cch tham Dhab ahaan, ammaanka dadweynaha gia: Magkomento
connected community. All Seattle residents who have a stake in better policing are invited to share their thoughts about improving SPD practices and their ideas on how to build trust between Seattles diverse communities and SPD.
Naninindigan ang Komisyon sa mahu Guddiga waxaa dhab ka ah in ay si wanaagsan u qabato na pagpu say at patas pulisy a. hawsha boliiska iyo in ay dhowrto cadaaladda.
The
ia policial una vigilanc prometida con licing. n est com fair po La Comisi effective, y justa. n mitted to ecaz www.seattle.gov/policecommissio is com ion iss Comm
SPCbrochure090513_SCH.indd 2-3
Korean
Our city.
Our ciudad raty. Nuest safe Our
10/16/13
5:08 PM
10/16/13 4:59 PM
chng ta.
10/16/13 4:33 PM
10/16/13 5:03 PM
S an ton
ca chng
kung sama-sama .
ta. Cnh st
ca chng
ta. Cng nhau
In 2013, the CPC policy workgroups beneted from the collaboration and technical assistance of many individuals including the DOJ and the U.S. Attorneys
www.s
eattle.
2-3 600 4 mission WA 9810 policecom Seattle, ttle.gov/ h Avenue, 600 Fourt www.sea mission licecom gov/po SPCbrochure090513_KO.indd
0513_ES .indd 2-3
Fourth Avenue
, Seattle, WA
98104
Spanish
10/16/13 5:05 PM
tin b.
10/16/13
4:27 PM
SPCbrochure09
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire about the Seattle Police Department and ways to help the police better serve our community. Your answers will be held in strictest confidence. 1. First, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree Dont Know
Community Police Commission Questionnaire
Fall 2013
The Seattle Police treat people of all races and ethnicities equally The Seattle Police do a good job keeping people safe The Seattle Police serve all areas of Seattle equally The Seattle Police do a good job serving your neighborhood
2. For each item, please indicate how often you think Seattle Police officers do these things.
Very Often Somewhat Often Not That Often Almost Never Don't Know
Engage in racial profiling Treat people differently because of their race Treat people differently because of their gender or gender identity Stop people in cars without good reason Stop people on the street or in public places without good reason Use excessive physical force Use verbally abusive language Use racial slurs towards minorities Use homophobic slurs towards minorities Harass people for no good reason Treat people respectfully Quickly solve crimes and arrest criminals 1
True Connecting our communities and the Seattle Police Department public The 2010 shooting death by Seattle police of First Nations woodcarver John T. Williams, a series of other serious incidents involving police and people of color, ignited safety and public concern about excessive use of force and bias in the Seattle Police Department (SPD). After a federal investigation, the City of Seattle signed a settlement agreement can only with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to reform SPD practices. A memorandum of understanding details the work to be done and also mandated the establishment of the happen Seattle Community Police Commission (CPC) to provide community input on the SPD reform process and reform proposals. Policy changes will be made to ensure that police services in Seattle comply with the Constitution, and the laws of Washington and the when the United States. In addition to recommending changes in police practices, the CPC will also assess the need to improve the Citys police accountability system and work to promote community public condence in SPD. and police The CPC is reaching out broadly to the people of Seattle to discuss needed reforms. During October 2013, in meetings throughout the city with Seattle residents, the CPC wants to hear what it will take to improve trust and respect between the community and SPD, and work to understand how SPD can improve its relations with community members. The CPC also wants to learn if policy recommendations under consideration make sense and if any together. changes should be made to them.
CPC members:
(Currently there are two vacancies on the commission)
Commissioners
The CPC consists of 15 members appointed by the Mayor and conrmed by the City Council. Members represent the diversity of Seattle and include people from communities of color, ethnic and faith communities, immigrant communities, the urban Indian community, the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender community, civil rights advocates, the business community, individuals familiar with the challenges faced by those with mental illness or substance abuse issues, and youth. One member is from the Seattle Police Ofcers Guild and one is from the Seattle Police Management Association. CPC members live or work in all ve Seattle police precincts.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2013 Community Outreach Process

The CPC sought the perspectives of the general public, police ofcers and their union representatives, and other key stakeholders in the reform process, but commissioners were particularly interested in learning the views of those in Seattle who have had historically troubled relationships with SPD, or who have been traditionally underrepresented in the policy making process. The CPC made a special effort to invite members of these underrepresented communities to offer their perspectives on police department reform in safe forums by contracting with 13 community-based organizations that directly serve hard-to-reach populations, and by reaching out to many more. In all, more than 100 organizations participated in the outreach effort. The CPC and its partners and supporters brought together more than 3,400 community members at over 150 meetings. Both quantitative and qualitative feedback was receivedparticipants completed over 3,000 survey questionnaires and facilitators extensively documented key themes identied during the meeting dialogues. While most surveys were completed in English, 464 surveys translated into languages other than English were completed. in English by telephone, provides useful information and an overview of the opinions of Seattles population as a whole. However, the CPC thought it important to provide other avenues to ensure equitable access to people who traditionally have not had a voice, and who may have substantial concerns with police practices in order to get a more complete picture of community attitudes. For this reason, the CPC surveys were administered in multiple languages, conducted in facilitated meetings in marginalized communities and hosted by trusted community leaders. Special care was taken to receive input from people with mental illness and other disabilities. The Monitor has agreed that the CPC survey results will be valuable in providing a complete baseline of community attitudes about SPD.
Demographics
The CPC was successful in its goal of reaching many underrepresented people. Seventy-two percent (72%) of the surveys were completed by individuals who identied themselves as people of color. (The Commission acknowledges that the term people of color has different connotations and is meant here to describe people who, though vastly different, do not identify as Caucasian.) Over 24% identied as immigrant or refugee. Twelve percent (12%) were under age 18, 18% were between 18 and 25 years old and 23% were 56 years of age or older. The split between males and females was generally even (49% and 48% respectively), and 1% identied as transgender. About 16% identied as gay, lesbian or bisexual.
5
Survey Results
The CPC survey was designed to facilitate broader participation; it was not designed or administered in a way that would result in a statistical representation of community views of all who live or work in Seattle. In order to ensure comparability, many questions in the CPC survey were similar to those in a community survey commissioned last year by the federal Monitor overseeing the Settlement Agreement on police reform in Seattle. The CPC survey asked additional questions and captured more demographic information about respondents. The Monitors survey, conducted
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Equality of Treatment
A large majority (68%) do not believe the SPD treats people of different races and ethnicities equally and 65% do not believe the SPD serves all areas of Seattle equally. Two-thirds or more believe Seattle police do not treat people who are homeless or those with criminal records as well as others. More than 50% feel those with mental illness or problems with alcohol or drugs, young people, and people who are Islamic or of Middle Eastern descent are not treated equally and more than 40% do not believe members of the LGBT community are treated as well as others. Respondents generally believe police engage in a range of negative actions very often or somewhat often. The highest results concerned treating people differently because of their race73%, racial proling69%, and use excessive physical force60%. All of the remaining negative behaviors except two scored above 50%.
Policies to Improve SPDs Performance

The survey also included a question about ways to improve SPDs performance. Several of these areas provided feedback specic to elements included in the CPCs draft policy recommendations. A very large percentage (75% to 88%) believes these steps may, or will, make a difference.
Overall Findings
Even though survey respondents reported numerous negative views of the police, they still gave the police relatively overall high marks for keeping people safe, doing a good job serving their neighborhoods, and treating people respectfully. In short, even though respondents believe that the police are effective in doing their jobs in the community as a whole, a large number of respondents completing the survey believe SPD treats some people unequally and that SPD ofcers engage in numerous negative behaviors.
Interaction with SPD and the Accountability Process

Nearly a third of the respondents have made a complaint to SPD, and of those 57% were dissatised with how SPD handled it. Nearly two-thirds (64%) have had or a member of their family has had a personal experience with SPD, and of those 60% rated the experience negatively. An open-ended question asked those with experience with SPD to comment and fully 71% responded. Almost half (48%) of the comments were coded as having a negative sentiment. Most comments expressed concern about the police being physically or verbally aggressive (14%), being rude/disrespectful (13%), and concern about police discrimination (12%).
Key Themes from Community Meetings

People attending community meetings identied what needs to change in SPD, offered ideas and solutions, and provided feedback on the CPCs draft policy recommendations. The major themes raised during the meetings were consistent with the survey ndings. There is deep distrust of SPD due to peoples belief and experience that some police ofcers demonstrate bias, stop people unfairly, use unnecessary force and avoid scrutiny by failing to employ in-car video recordings properly.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
People attending community meetings identied what needs to change in SPD, offered ideas and solutions, and provided feedback on the CPCs draft policy recommendations.
Bias
Those who attended the meetings believed police demonstrate bias by proling and by lack of understanding and tolerance of other cultures and customs and by other behaviors including rudeness, disrespect, intimidation and bullying. They believe police are unresponsive to some crime victims and some neighborhoods receive less servicebecause of either individual bias or institutional practices that result in biased outcomes. There was strong support for hiring more ofcers from diverse backgrounds and for mandating effective cultural competency and other training (i.e. crisis intervention) that provides ofcers vital skills in dealing with many different people. There is also strong support for a robust accountability system to track complaints, collect data and measure success in reducing bias in SPD. There was strong support of the CPC policy recommendations on bias-free policing, and some suggested that an education component is needed so community members know their rights to le bias complaints and how the associated investigation process works. great need to educate the public and train ofcers on their rights and obligations in this area, and perhaps provide the public tools to use when stopped. Although many participants were positive about the intent of the CPC policy recommendationsto make clear the rules for stopsa number expressed concern that the recommendations did not entirely address the problem. As provided under the CPCs proposed bias-free policing policy, there was support for documenting and tracking stops to identify patterns of disproportionate treatment of those stopped by the police.
Use of Force
There is signicant concern that police too often use force when it is unnecessary, sometimes exacerbating situations by resorting to bullying or abuse. Many cited personal experience or knowledge of the problem in their own communities. Solutions most often concerned training ofcers to deal with difcult individuals, de-escalating incidents and providing education to the public on the rules on using force and on how to report incidents. A number of strategies in hiring and providing ongoing support to ofcers were also suggested. Many commented that SPDs proposed policy was cumbersome and that it would help both ofcers and the public if the policy was simplied and clearer. Participants supported the proposed SPD policy related to reporting and investigating most use of force incidents, although some believed even minimal use of force incidents should also be
Stops and Detentions

Many believe some people are stopped unfairly due to racial and other proling, prejudice, ignorance of customs, criminal backgrounds or for other reasons that are not valid. They believe ofcers may not understand the limits of their authority to stop and detain, and many community members do not know their rights in these situations. They believe there is a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
reported and investigated. Participants made several additional policy recommendations, including that the policy establish use of force and de-escalation standards to be used in situations involving civil disobedience.
In-Car Video Recordings

Community members expressed considerable skepticism about police use of in-car video recordings. Many favored very limited ofcer discretion (more automatic triggering of cameras, with some support for having cameras on all the time). The need for community education was emphasized to ensure the public understands both the manual and automatic mechanisms for recording, as well as their rights to document police actions. Many expressed support for an effective accountability system to ensure compliance with recording policies. Most also supported the CPC recommendations and believe consistent, reliable recordings are in the best interest of both ofcers and the public. Some suggested that SPD look into the value of body cameras, especially for ofcers not using patrol cars; and while wanting recordings available, many expressed concern about the right to privacy and thought the policy should address this difcult issue.
with whom they have had good experiencesby their actions, these ofcers showed respect and demonstrated that they cared, offered help, and related to the challenges faced by these young people. A key theme struck over and over is the need for ofcers to form relationships with the diverse communities in Seattle. There were many suggestions for how police could initiate better connections with the communities they serve. These connections could improve communications and relationships which are not effectively served by some of the formal channels that exist today.
Current Status and Next Steps for 2014

Community Engagement Report
The report on the outcomes of the CPCs community engagement activities in 2013 will be issued to the parties of the Settlement Agreement, and to others with a high interest in and responsibility for public safety and police accountability in Seattle, including the organizations and individuals the CPC partnered with to conduct its outreach.
Review of Adopted Policies

The court has already approved a new use of force policy for SPD and nal policies on bias-free policing, stops and detentions and in-car video recordings will be approved and in place in early 2014. The CPC will review the approved policies, assess the extent to which they incorporate key provisions recommended by the CPC, and report back to the community on the provisions in the nal policies, how these compare with the CPCs recommendations and on the recent policy making process.
Ideas for Future Change

Despite criticism, participants also shared many favorable observations about SPD ofcers and suggested various improvements. Some participants reported the positive, respectful interactions they had experienced with SPD ofcers. Others noted that a single bad ofcer can taint the reputation of the whole department; and some identied poor behavior of ofcers in other jurisdictions that unfairly tarnishes the reputation of SPD ofcers. A number of youth talked of ofcers they trust and
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The CPC will review the approved policies, assess the extent to which they incorporate key provisions recommended by the CPC, and report back to the community on the provisions in the nal policies, how these compare with the CPCs recommendations and on the recent policy making process.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Training on Key Policies
In 2014, the CPC will make recommendations on training curricula and related topics associated with training in a number of areas including bias-free policing, stops and detentions, use of force and crisis intervention. The deadlines for CPC recommendations vary, with some to be delivered during the rst and others during the second quarter of the year.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Outreach

The CPC is also responsible for reporting on SPDs community outreach initiatives and may suggest strategies the department can employ to increase public condence. The timeline for this work during 2014 has not yet been established.
Workgroup Members
Community Engagement Workgroup Claudia DAllegri and Kate Joncas, Co-chairs Jay Hollingsworth Diane Narasaki Rev. Harriett Walden Bias-Free Policing Workgroup Jay Hollingsworth and Rev. Harriett Walden, Co-chairs Claudia DAllegri Lisa Daugaard Marcel Purnell Stops and Detentions Workgroup Bill Hobson and Jennifer Shaw, Co-chairs Lisa Daugaard Kate Joncas Joseph Kessler Kevin Stuckey Rev. Aaron Williams Use of Force Workgroup Joseph Kessler and Rev. Aaron Williams, Co-chairs Jay Hollingsworth Kate Joncas Jennifer Shaw Kevin Stuckey Rev. Harriett Walden
Data Analysis and Recommendations Regarding Patterns in Enforcement Actions

Pursuant to the new bias-free policing policy, SPD will partner with the CPC to identify areas in which disproportionate enforcement occurs with respect to certain racial, ethnic or national origin groups, and where other equally effective practices might yield less disproportionate outcomes. Researchers working with the CPC will analyze SPD data on arrests, stops, detentions, citations and use of force in support of that project.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Accountability

The CPC will also review SPDs accountability system, including the policies, structure and processes of the Ofce of Professional Accountability (OPA). It expects to make recommendations in this area by April 30th.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT
10
I. The Seattle Community Police Commission

In 2012 the City of Seattle entered into a Settlement Agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to reform the Seattle Police Department (SPD) after the DOJ reported a pattern or practice of constitutional violations in use of force and concerns about biased policing by SPD. The Settlement Agreement called for the creation of the Seattle Community Police Commission (CPC) which, among other tasks, is charged with providing community input on the police department reform process and reform proposals. The commissioners represent a broad range of community perspectives and are responsible for engaging Seattles diverse communities to understand and express their viewpoints, and to give them a voice and stake in improving police services. Throughout the settlement period, the CPC will conduct ongoing conversations with community members to ask for ideas and thoughts about police practices and how to improve communitypolice relations. The CPC is depending on community involvement over the long haulthe community perspective on suggested reforms is needed in the short-term, but is also needed over time to let us know if in its view the changes made by SPD really work. A Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Seattle and the DOJ details the CPCs responsibilities. These include making recommendations and reviewing proposals for police reform. In 2013, the rst year of the Settlement Agreement, the CPC was charged with assessing and making recommendations on policies concerning bias-free policing and stops and detentions. It also made recommendations concerning SPDs use of force policy and, at the request of the court-appointed Monitor, made recommendations concerning SPDs in-car video recording policies and practices. In 2013, the CPC policy workgroups beneted from the collaboration and technical assistance of many individuals to develop the draft and nal policy recommendations due during this period, including the DOJ and the U.S. Attorneys Ofce, the Seattle Police Monitor team, the Seattle City Attorneys Ofce, SPD (especially the Compliance team and Audit, Policy and Review staff), the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission, the Ofce of Professional Accountability Auditor, and the Seattle Human Rights Commission. Members of the CPC were appointed by the Mayor and conrmed by the City Council. Current members represent the diversity of Seattle and include civil rights advocates, people from communities of color, ethnic and faith communities, immigrant communities, the urban Indian community, the lesbian/gay/ bisexual/transgender community, the business community, and individuals familiar with the challenges faced by those with mental illness or substance abuse issues, and youth. One member is from the Seattle Police Ofcers Guild and one is from the Seattle Police Management Association. CPC members live or work in all ve Seattle police precincts.
11
II. The 2013 Community Outreach Process

Purpose
The CPC launched a wide-reaching effort during October 2013 to engage Seattles diverse communities in discussion about its draft recommendations in the areas of bias-free policing, stops and detentions, use of force, and in-car video recordings. In addition to soliciting input about these policies, the community outreach effort was designed to provide information about the reform process in general and the role of the CPC, to gather feedback on community experience with the police, and to obtain guidance for future community engagement activities. The CPC considered comments from the community and stakeholders prior to issuing its policy recommendations on November 15, 2013.
Focus
A major focus of the CPC is to engage Seattles diverse communities in dialogue that will help restore public trust and condence in SPD. To do so, it is particularly important to learn the views of those in Seattle whose relationships with SPD have been troubled, or who have not traditionally been included in the policy making process. The CPC believed these groups needed to be invited to offer their perspectives, and to feel welcome to participate in an ongoing community discussion that supports police department reform. Open and honest conversations will be a cornerstone to building community trust in SPD and to providing SPD with critically important information from community members, especially those most affected by police practices. To reach these individuals, the CPC partnered with community organizations with experience serving them. The CPC partners hosted over 150 meetings in many languages and communities which allowed those in hard-to-reach groups to participate in the review process, completing surveys and providing observations and feedback on policy recommendations, on SPD practices and on needed improvements. At the same time, the CPC sought the perspectives of the
general public throughout Seattle, and met with police department ofcers, their union representatives, and other key stakeholders and technical advisors before nalizing its policy recommendations.
Structure
The rst year Monitoring Plan established an aggressive timeline for delivery of an initial set of policy revisions. This was in order to ensure that reforms are not delayedthe federal court and the Monitor overseeing the settlement want police reforms to be in place as soon as possible. Given these circumstances, the CPC was challenged to reach the community, including those most impacted by police practices, within a condensed four week time frame. In addition, the CPC recognized it would be a challenge to engage many groups due to language barriers, and cultural and other factors, which might make them reticent to participate. Some might not be willing to speak with an unknown individual or to someone associated with the government; others have long histories of distrusting the police that might lead them to view the outreach process with skepticism and cause them to not want to participate.
12
The CPC determined that the best way to engage hard-to-reach communities was to contract with community-based organizations that directly serve these communities. The CPC issued a request for proposals that resulted in contracts with 13 community partners. Many of these community partners coordinated their outreach work with other organizations. The CPC beneted from the help of other supporting organizations and individuals who also held meetings so their constituents could hear about the CPCs work and share their views. These conveners conducted additional outreach to targeted communities. The CPC itself met with neighborhood and crime prevention councils, SPD advisory groups and with police department ofcers. Appendix A provides details about the CPCs contracted partners and other conveners, the many other organizations with whom they coordinated, and the groups with whom they met. Appendix B lists the meetings in the community where the discussions were held last October. The CPC supplied its contracted partners and conveners with a toolkit of outreach materials, including background information on the CPC, its charge and its draft policy recommendations, as well as surveys to capture feedback. Meeting attendees were encouraged to spread the word about the outreach effort to their friends, family and associates and told that all materials, including an online survey, were available on the CPCs website. The CPC also sent out e-newsletters and encouraged community members to sign up for its listserv. Key background material is in Appendix C. The survey tool is in Appendix D. In order to reach non-English and limitedEnglish procient Seattle residents the CPC provided many outreach materials in translation.
The survey was available in nine languages other than English (Amharic, Arabic, ChineseTraditional, Chinese-Simplied, Korean, Somali, Spanish, Tagalog, and Vietnamese). Surveys in English were also orally translated into Cambodian, Cantonese, Garifuna, Hindi, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Mandarin, Mien, Samoan, Somali, Thai, Vietnamese and the Zapotec dialect. In addition to English, the online survey was available in Spanish. The brochure and fact sheet were also available in seven languages other than English. In some meetings, the facilitators led discussions in the native language of the participants. Assistance in completing the survey was available for individuals who were illiterate in their own language and for those who had difculty due to mental illness or disability. Participants provided feedback through paper and online surveys, and by discussing their concerns and ideas during community meetings. Meeting facilitators documented the comments received in these sessions and summarized them in nal reports to the CPC. Community members were told their feedback would be condential.
13
Outreach Overview
The CPC partnered with 13 social service providers representing low-income, underserved, minority and nonEnglish speaking populations. Many other organizations coordinated outreach with these partner organizations, and the CPC, along with several other organizations and individuals, also convened community meetings. Altogether, the CPC and more than 100 community groups hosted over 151 outreach events. More than 3,400 individuals attended outreach events with an average of about 20 attendees at each event. Community members completed 3,001 surveys. Over 70 percent of respondents received or heard about the survey from community organizations. In addition to English, surveys were available in nine other languages, orally translated into 14 more, and 464 were completed in languages other than English. About 16 percent of the survey respondents identied as gay, lesbian or bisexual.
Greenwood
University District
12 percent of the survey

respondents were under age 18 and 23 percent were 56 years of age or older.
Queen Anne
Capitol Hill Central District
Downtown
West Seattle
The CPC and community groups held meetings in many locations around the city. Red dots represent meeting locations and are not indicative of the number of meetings.
Beacon Hill
High Point
Rainier Valley
The organizations and individuals conducting outreach activities in October included: Asian Counseling and Referral Services Chinese Information and Service Center Community Police Commission Downtown Emergency Services Center Entre Hermanos El Rey 1360 AM G3 and Associates Karen Studders LGBTQ Allyship One America Peoples Harm Reduction Alliance Public Defender Association Safe Futures Youth Center Seattle Chinatown/ International District Preservation and Development Authority Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness Sojourner Technical Services Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Union Gospel Mission Vietnamese Friendship Association
72 percent of the surveys were
completed by individuals who identied themselves as people of color.
Over 24 percent of the survey respondents identied as an immigrant or refugee.
14
III. Outreach Results

Survey Results
Introduction
The CPC survey was not administered in a way that would result in a proportional cross-section of all community views. The conscious intent was to ensure the survey was available to and completed by those who traditionally have not had a voice and who may have substantial concerns with police practices including people of color, immigrants and refugees, youth, members of the LGBT community, persons who are homeless, and people who are mentally ill or have substance abuse problems. Cross-tabulation results or correlations are also presented to show differences between groups of respondents and their answers to the survey questions. The correlations were tested for statistical signicance, which is the probability that a result is not likely due to just chance alone. In social science research, correlations are assigned a probability, and in this research (as is standard) only correlations with probabilities at the .05 level or higher and that are meaningful to understanding the data, are reported.1 Correlation values vary between 0.0 and 1.0, but in social science research it is unlikely to obtain correlations higher than 0.4. To ease interpretation of correlation ndings, these labels are used to indicate the strength of the correlations: +/-0.4 and above very strong +/-0.3 to +/- .39 strong +/-0.2 to +/- .29 moderate +/-0.1 to +/-.19 slight less than +/-0.1 weak
1
Only slight or moderate correlations that were statistically signicant at the .05 level or higher and were meaningful to understanding the data were found in our analysis of the CPC survey data. The correlation analysis was conducted on the following groups of respondents: Race Age Gender Sexual identity Immigration status (immigrant vs. nonimmigrant) Race by immigration status (e.g. Asian immigrants vs. Asian non-immigrants) Immigration status by age (e.g. older immigrants vs. younger immigrants) The area of Seattle respondents spend most of their time in
Probability at the .05 level or higher indicates the condence in the correlation, or that
one can be 95% or more condent that the correlation is not due to chance.
15
Totals
The results are based on 3,001 completed surveys. Most surveys (2,359) were completed on the paper version during facilitated sessions with community partners, but 642 were provided online. The majority of surveys were completed in English, but 464 surveys that had been translated into non-English languages were completed. The breakdown of survey results by language is as follows:
English 2,537 Spanish 275 Vietnamese 48 Traditional Chinese 69 Simplied Chinese 44 Somali 23 Korean 5
Demographics
The CPC was successful in its goal of reaching many underrepresented people.
Please select your race
Seventy-two percent (72%) of the surveys were completed by individuals identifying as other than white. The breakdown is shown in this graph:
Many respondents identied as immigrant and/or refugee (24%), and many reported speaking numerous languages other than English at home, the most frequently
mentioned being Spanish, Vietnamese, Somali, and Chinese. Appendix E lists a multitude of languages identied in response to this question.
16
The CPC also sought to reach members of the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender community. Forty-nine percent (49%) of the respondents
were male and 48% were female. About 1% identied as transgender. About 16% identied as gay, lesbian or bisexual.
17
A large number of young people completed the questionnaire. Fully 30% of the respondents were 25 years old or younger, and of these 12%
were 17 or younger. The complete age breakout of respondents is shown below:
Community perceptions and experience

In September 2013 the federal Monitor released a community survey about SPD which the Monitor commissioned. Respondents (n=900) were selected at random, with interviews apportioned geographically by police precinct. The interviews were conducted in English by telephone, both landline and cell, and some demographic characteristics were measured. The Monitors survey provides useful information for understanding community attitudes toward SPD. However, the CPC thought additional information obtained by different methods would offer more equitable access to participation and get a more complete picture of community attitudes. In order to ensure comparability, the CPC survey included many of the same questions that the Monitors survey asked concerning perceptions of SPD. However, for the Monitors question about whether SPD treats different groups
the same as others, the CPC survey added a number of groups to the question (Asian/ Pacic Islander, Islamic/Middle Eastern descent, lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender, people with mental illness or problems with alcohol or drugs, and those with a criminal record). The CPC survey also added several response options to a question about police actions (treat people differently because of their gender or gender identity and use homophobic slurs towards minorities). Finally, the CPC survey asked for additional demographic information, capturing data on gender identity, immigrant and/or refugee status, and identifying Pacic Islanders separately from other Asians. This additional demographic information allowed the CPC to report the views of these community members. Among those responding to the CPCs survey, a very large majority (68%) do not believe the SPD treats people of different races and ethnicities equally. A similarly large majority (65%) do not believe SPD serves all areas of Seattle equally.
18
About 53% believe the police do a good job keeping people safe, but 41% disagree. Fortyseven percent (47%) believe SPD does a good
job serving their neighborhood, while nearly 44% disagree.
19
The CPC survey asks whether the police treat members of racial and ethnic groups and other groups the same as others or not as well as others in the community. The results are stark. Two-thirds or more believe Seattle police do not treat people who are homeless, Latinos/ Hispanics, those with a criminal record, or African Americans the same as others. Even groups that did not hit the threshold of twothirds were believed by high margins (41% to 65%) to not be treated as well as others.
Not only does the overall response show a high percentage of respondents agreeing that all groups are not treated equally, but within groups similarly high percentages believe their specic group is not treated equally. (These data were not available for some groups, including people who are Islamic or of Middle Eastern descent, or people who are homeless, have mental illness or problems with alcohol or drugs, and those with a criminal record.)
People with mental illness/alcohol/drugs (N=2781)
20
Statistical Relationships Found:
21
Another question concerned whether respondents thought police treat people respectfully and quickly solved crimes and arrested criminals, or whether they behave in a number of inappropriate ways. By very wide margins respondents believe the police engage in a range of negative actions very often or somewhat often. The highest results concerned treating people differently because of their race73%, racial proling69%, and use of excessive physical force60%. All of the remaining negative behaviors except two scored above 50%. In contrast, half (50%) thought the police treated people respectfully very often or somewhat often.
The negative behaviors indicated as occurring very often or somewhat often by more than half of the respondents were: Use of excessive physical force Stopping people on the street or public places without good reason Using verbally abusive language Treating people differently because of their gender or gender identity Stopping people in cars without good reason Harassing people for no good reason
22
Nearly a third (32%) of the respondents have made a complaint to SPD. Of those who made a complaint, over half (57%) were dissatised with how SPD handled it.
Many respondents (64%) have had or a member of their family has had a personal experience with SPD. Of these, three-fths (60%) rated the experience as negative or somewhat negative.
The survey followed with an open-ended question that asked these respondents to comment on their, or a family members, experience with SPD. Fully 71% of those who
reported experience with SPD commented. As shown in the chart below, almost half (48%) of the comments were coded as having a negative sentiment.
1923
23
More specically, the comments about respondents experience with SPD indicated that most negative concerns involved police being rude/disrespectful (13%), discrimination (12%), and police being physically aggressive (8%). Ten percent (10%) indicated that the police had treated them politely and respectfully.
The survey did not ask if the experience led to a conviction or arrest. There could be a bias of those with convictions or arrests to view the SPD negatively. However, regardless of the potential bias of some respondents, the negative behaviors specically cited may still be problematic and improvements made.
Police physically aggressive
24
Steps to improve SPD performance

The survey also included a question about ways to improve SPDs performance. Several of these areas provided feedback specic to the CPCs draft policy recommendations. As shown below, a very large percentage of survey respondents (75% to 88%) believe these steps may, or will, make a difference. The responses to this question, along with some of the qualitative feedback received (see below under key themes), demonstrate support for the CPCs draft policy recommendations which were ultimately nalized in November 2013.
25
Summary/Conclusions
The CPC survey was completed by many individuals from traditionally underrepresented groups, particularly those that have historically had difcult relations with the police. At least two-thirds of respondents believe the police do not treat all groups equally, and that they engage in racial proling and other inappropriate behaviors. More than half of those who have led complaints to the SPD are dissatised with how their complaints were handled. Almost two-thirds of those who have had or who have a family member who has had experience with the police also rated the experience negatively. However, by very high margins, respondents also believe there are steps the police can take that may, or will, make a difference in improving SPDs performance. Even though survey respondents reported numerous negative views of the police, they still gave the police relatively high marks for keeping people safe, doing a good job in neighborhoods, and treating people respectfully. In short, even though respondents believe that the police are effective in doing their jobs in the community as a whole, a large number of respondents completing the survey believe SPD treats some people unequally and that SPD ofcers engage in numerous negative behaviors. Many of the statistically signicant correlations showing differences in responses by race, age, gender, immigration status, sexual identity, immigration by age, or immigration by race were slight (correlations between .10 and .19). The survey sample size is also larger than necessary for a representative statistical analysis, which can result in small statistically signicant correlations that are not relevant. There was a very strong consensus reected in all the responses, and generally small differences between groups.
Key Themes from Community Meetings

People attending community meetings offered extensive comments, particularly related to the four policy areas in which the CPC wanted feedback. In each of these areas, participants identied what needs to change in SPD, offered ideas and solutions, and provided feedback on the CPCs draft policy recommendations. Participants also offered positive comments, identied areas of concern, and made suggestions and recommendations about SPD in general and about the CPC and the outreach process it conducted. Appendix F provides a summary of the comments received.
General Observations about SPD

While many comments reect deep distrust of SPD, there were also many favorable observations and suggestions for improvements. Some participants discussed the positive, respectful interactions they had experienced with SPD ofcers. Others noted that a single bad ofcer can taint the reputation of the whole department; and some identied poor behavior of ofcers in other jurisdictions that unfairly tarnishes the reputation of SPD ofcers. A number of youth talked of ofcers they trust and with whom they have had good experiencesby their actions, these ofcers showed respect and demonstrated that they cared, offered help, and related to the challenges faced by these young people. A key theme struck over and over is the need for ofcers to form relationships with the diverse communities in Seattle. There were multiple suggestions for how police could better connect with the communities they serveand belief that those connections should be fostered among and be the responsibility of all ofcers. These connections could improve communications and relationships which are not effectively served by some of the formal channels that exist today.
26
People attending community meetings offered extensive comments, particularly related to the four policy areas in which the CPC wanted feedback.
Bias-Free Policing
Those attending the meetings believe SPD ofcers do not treat people equally and that bias is demonstrated towards individuals in a wide range of different groups. Many believe ofcers lack understanding and tolerance of other cultures and customs (including youth culture) and may make unfair judgments based on group association. Participants believe bias is demonstrated by proling, but also in other troubling ways. Police are perceived to use intimidation, resort to bullying, and to be angry, rude, disrespectful and insensitive in their interactions with people in specic groups. Participants also perceive that police may misinterpret as uncooperative, or make unfair assumptions about those whose English is accented or who do not speak English. There is concern that ofcers are unfair or unresponsive in how they deal with some crime victims (minority business owners, sex workers, domestic violence victims in same-sex relationships, homeless people or those in supported housing, addicted people, those with criminal records), and a belief that there is insufcient police protection of some neighborhoods or groups based on racial, income and cultural factors. For example, some are hesitant about calling 9-1-1 due to cultural factors, but SPD makes some deployment decisions based on these call volumes. Others dont call police because of their undocumented status.
The best ways to address bias include increasing the diversity of SPD ofcers and to mandate cultural competency training that addresses racial bias and bias against other groups, and that helps ofcers understand the impact of the power differential that exists between them and community members. Some think it would be helpful if those most impacted in the community were involved in designing and leading such trainings. The need for all ofcers to receive crisis intervention training was also cited. It may be helpful for ofcers to not just patrol, but spend time in community service, with the people they serve. There is support for the CPC bias-free policy recommendations. Assuming the policy is adopted, it was suggested that an education component is needed so community members know their right to le a bias complaint and how the investigation process works. Some expressed support for heavier (nancial) penalties for violating the policy. It is important that SPD employ systems that track complaints, triggers reports to supervisors, and has mechanisms in place to enforce the policy and hold ofcers accountable. Systems need to be in place to collect data and measure success in reducing both individual and institutional bias in SPD.
27
Stops and Detentions

Many believe some people are stopped unfairly due to racial and other proling, prejudice, ignorance of customs, criminal backgrounds or for other reasons that are not valid. For members of some groups, concern was expressed about unlawful searches and seizures, and unreasonably long detentions and releases without explanation. Stops are particularly difcult for people who do not speak English or have limited English prociency. Ofcers dont seem to understand the limits of their authority to stop and detain since some presume guilt without justication or make stops without sufcient cause. Ofcers may not explain the reason for the stop and some become hostile when individuals assert their rights by asking questions about why they were stopped. Many community members do not know their rights in these situations or whether there is a complaint or appeal system. There is a great need to educate the public about their rights and obligations when stops occur. One idea was to develop an educational rule book to teach people the difference between voluntary and involuntary stops, and what to do and who to call when stopped; another idea was to partner with trusted community organizations to educate the community, including those with many nonEnglish speaking members. The provision of interpreter services and/or a card they could show police that identies their language might also be helpful. There was also strong support for ofcer training and several useful and detailed suggestions for how the community can support appropriate training and what the training should entail. Interest was also expressed in having an ongoing dialogue with SPD about its progress in ofcer training in this area.
Many were positive about the intent of the CPC stops and detentions policy recommendations to make clear when ofcers may or may not stop, detain and search people and to make clear the rights and obligations of the ofcer and the stopped individual. There was support for requiring ofcers to explicitly identify themselves and explain the reason for the stop; and also for notifying the stopped individual of their rights. Concern was expressed that the difference between voluntary and involuntary stops isnt clear (the denition of reasonable suspicion, the basis for an investigatory stop, is too vague) and what ofcers may require (identication, etc.) isnt clear. As provided under the CPCs proposed bias-free policing policy, there was support for documenting and tracking stops to identify patterns of disproportionate treatment of those stopped by the police.
Use of Force
There is signicant concern that police too often use force when it is unnecessary. A fair number of African Americans either had rsthand knowledge or knew someone who had experienced excessive use of force; there is deep pain and concern about use of force against members of the Native/Urban Indian community; and street youth and those in the homeless community think there are too many incidents of excessive force in these communities, including physical force, drawn weapons and use of mace/tasers. There is also concern that ofcers use bullying tactics and abusive language which escalates situations. Use of force is an issue in certain areas of the city, specically Rainier Beach and the Central District. Key ideas in the area of use of force include establishing new and regular training that ensures ofcers have de-escalation skills and know how to deal with difcult individuals;
28
providing public education to community members so they know the rules on using force and on how to report incidents; and employing a number of innovative strategies in hiring and providing ongoing support to ofcers. Many commented that SPDs proposed use of force policy was cumbersome and that it would help both ofcers and the public if the policy was simplied and made clearer. As provided in the proposed SPD policy, there was support for reporting and investigating most use of force incidents, while some believe even minimal use of force incidents should also be reported and investigated. There were several specic policy suggestions: pointing a gun should be classied in a more serious category since there is a potential intent to shoot if drawn; once a person is handcuffed, force should be minimal; whenever possible, interpreters should be called in prior to using force when dealing
with limited English procient individuals; and the use of stop sticks may be extreme and the policy should classify their use accordingly. The policy should also establish use of force and de-escalation standards to be used in situations involving civil disobedience.
In-Car Video Recordings

There is considerable skepticism about how the police record, use and retain in-car video recordings because of incidents where recordings were unavailable or unusable. Some believe police move interactions outside the range of cameras, intentionally lose, tamper with or destroy recording footage; some believe ofcers deliberately disregard policies and procedures since there is little, if any, consequence in doing so. Many also express concern about ofcers harassing bystanders and telling them it is illegal to record police actions.
29
As in the other policy areas, the value of community education was stressed. The public needs to understand how recordings are automatically triggered and when there is ofcer discretion (rules for manually starting/stopping recordings). The public also needs to know there is a right to document police actions. Police ofcers also should be educated that recordings are in their best interestthe recordings protect both ofcers and the public. Many feel increased use of recordings will support public trust in SPD, make people feel safer, support ofcer professionalism, and training and accountability. Most expressed support for the CPC in-car video recordings recommendations and noted they were very specic and clear. There is value in having more consistent, reliable recordings which may reduce inappropriate behavior and document appropriate behavior by ofcers. Many expressed support for an effective accountability system to ensure compliance with in-car video recording policies. Ofcer discretion in recording is not favored and there was some support for having cameras on all the time. Some suggested the value of using body cameras, especially for ofcers on foot, bikes, horses and Segways. While wanting recordings available, many expressed concern about the right to privacy and thought the policy should address this difcult issue.
The CPC and Community Engagement

The organizations and individuals involved in reaching out to the community gave the CPC signicant access to a broad range of communities. Those community members and CPCs partners expressed strong support of the CPCs work and appreciated being asked to participate and provide feedback. Even with serious time constraints, the results exceeded the CPCs expectationsand the interest and enthusiasm of the hosting organizations and individuals, and of the community members who contributed their views, were remarkable. Many expressed a high interest in having future opportunities for discussions on police practices and reform, and look forward to being consulted during CPCs upcoming outreach activities. Nevertheless, the CPCs partners in particular were challenged by the time constraints under which the 2013 outreach process occurred. Many noted that the short window prevented important partners and constituencies from fully participating and that this limitation might make it difcult to provide meaningful input. After the outreach process, a concern was also raised that the CPCs policy recommendations were submitted prior to this complete accounting of community feedback. The toolkit materials provided by the CPC were well received, but in the future these should be simplied and condensed. There were issues
30
with the accuracy of translated materials, and ensuring difcult concepts were transcribed into understandable lay languageeither in English or translation. There is also a high interest in receiving community education in the futureparticipants believe the public is eager for information about their rights, how to le complaints, how the police accountability system works, and the reform process. Many are skeptical that the reform process will be successful, but are hopeful since it under the jurisdiction of the federal court. The community members who participated and the CPCs partners want tangible evidence of progress in police reform. An ongoing dialogue with the community is needed and should include periodic reports on progress, including: Details on the extent to which adopted policies incorporate the CPC recommendations
Information on how community input inuenced nal policies and reform efforts in general Hard data tracking police practices (stops, complaints, and other measures) that demonstrate progress The results of annual surveys after reforms are implemented that show positive changes in community perceptions of SPD Many would like the CPC to engage the community on a regular basis to provide information and answer questions, not just when seeking feedback on the recommendations it is mandated to provide. In addition to community meetings, the CPC should employ both traditional and social media to inform the public about the value of the court-mandated reform process, about the CPCs critical and independent role in gathering and representing community views, and about the progress that has been made.
31
IV. Current Status and Next Steps

Report to the Community
This report on the outcomes of the CPCs community engagement activities in 2013 will be issued to the parties of the Settlement Agreement and to others with a high interest in and responsibility for public safety and police accountability in Seattle, including the organizations and individuals the CPC partnered with to conduct its outreach.
Update on Policy Development

The nal CPC policy recommendations on bias-free policing, stops and detentions and in-car video recordings which were informed by community input in October were issued November 15, 2013 and provided to the parties of the settlement and to the federal Monitor. This set of recommendations included the CPCs observations about SPDs proposed use of force policy. On November 27, 2013 the CPC completed its own proposed use of force policy and forwarded it to the parties and to the Monitor for consideration. Prior to the deadline of November 30, 2013 the Monitor led with the court his recommendation to approve a use of force policy (which included revisions made to the nal draft policy submitted by SPD last summer) and this policy was recently approved by the court. Similarly, the Monitors recommendation to approve bias-free policing and stops and detentions policies, with certain new revisions to prior last drafts, were led with the court on December 31, 2013 and are expected to be approved soon. An update to SPDs in-car video recording policy is not governed by a court deadline, but the Monitor requested CPC input to possible changes to this policy and a revised policy is likely to be adopted soon. Early in 2014, the CPC will review the adopted policies, assess the extent to which they
incorporate key provisions recommended by the CPC, and report back to the community on the provisions in the nal policies, how these compare with the CPCs recommendations and on the policy making process.
Upcoming CPC Work (2014)

The CPC will seek community perspectives concerning the topics on which it will issue recommendations during 2014, and it will continue to encourage and sponsor dialogue in the community on ways to improve communitypolice relations.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Training on Key Policies

The CPC will make recommendations on training curricula and related topics associated with training in a number of areas including bias-free policing, stops and detentions, use of force and crisis intervention. The deadline for the City of Seattle to provide nal drafts on training concerning bias-free policing and stops and detentions is July 17th. The nal drafts on training concerning use of force and crisis intervention are due March 16th and the nal drafts on training concerning SPDs Force Investigation Team and Use of Force Committee are due on June 16th. The CPC recommendations will be issued prior to the deadlines set for the City to provide its nal drafts.
32
Data Analysis and Recommendations Regarding Patterns in Enforcement Actions

Pursuant to the new bias-free policing policy, SPD will partner with the CPC to identify areas in which disproportionate enforcement occurs with respect to certain racial, ethnic or national origin groups, and where other equally effective practices might yield less disproportionate outcomes. Researchers working with the CPC will analyze SPD data on arrests, stops, detentions, citations and use of force in support of that project.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Accountability

The CPC will review SPDs accountability system, including the policies, structure and processes of the Ofce of Professional Accountability (OPA).The Citys nal drafts on OPAs policies and manual were delivered in late December 2013. The CPC expects to make its recommendations in this area by April 30th.
Review and Recommendations on SPD Outreach

The CPC is also responsible for reporting on SPDs community outreach initiatives and may suggest strategies the department can employ to increase public condence. The timeline for this work during 2014 has not yet been established.
33
34
Appendix A: Partners and Conveners Coordinating Organizations Targeted Populations
35
APPENDIX A
Community Partner/Convener
Coordinating Organizations
Targeted Groups
Asian Counseling and Referral Service CONVENER
Cleveland High School; Franklin High School; South Lake High School
Asian/Pacic Islander (Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Lao, Mien, Samoan, South Asian Indian, Thai and Vietnamese) A few African Americans (African American, Ethiopian, Haitian and Somali). American born, immigrant/refugee; all ages from youth through adult and including ACRS clients receiving behavioral health, substance abuse and youth services
Chinese Information and Service Center CONTRACTED PARTNER Community Police Commission CONVENER
Asian Pacic Directors Coalition; Seattle Chinese, Somali, Filipino, Vietnamese communities Chinatown/International District Preservation and Development Authority; Seattle Housing Authority City of Seattle Race and Social Justice Initiative; Neighborhood groups and SPD advisory groups; police union representatives; several organizations serving Seattle Department of Neighborhoods; Seattle at-risk youth and young adults Police Department; Seattle Police Ofcers Guild, Seattle Police Management Association: Seattle Youth Violence Prevention Initiative; YouthBuild. Briefed Belltown Community Council; neighborhood district councils (Central, Delridge, Downtown, Duwamish, East, Magnolia/Queen Anne, Northwest, Southeast); the Race and Social Justice Community Roundtable; SPD advisory groups (African American, East African, Filipino, Southeast Asian and the East Precinct advisory council and the South Seattle crime prevention council); SYVPI intake and case management staff. The CPC also briefed police union board members. Homeless community and those with mental health and chemical dependency issues Consejo Counseling, El Centro de la Raza, SeaMar Latino/Hispanic community Community Health Centers LGBTQ Allyship African American Leadership Forum; Breakfast Group; CenterStone; Central Area Senior Center; Immaculate Conception Church; Mount Zion Baptist Church; New Hope Missionary Baptist Church; Filipino American Historical Society; First African Methodist Episcopal Church; Seattle University Black Student Union; Tabernacle Missionary Baptist Church; Tabor 100; University of Washington Black Law Students Union; Urban League of Metropolitan Seattle Latino LGBTQ communities African American community
Downtown Emergency Services Center CONVENER El Rey 1360 AM CONTRACTED PARTNER Entre Hermanos CONTRACTED PARTNER G3 and Associates CONTRACTED PARTNER
36
APPENDIX A
Targeted Groups
Karen Studders CONVENER LGBTQ Allyship CONVENER
Native American and other homeless individuals not served by organized shelter or housing services APIChaya Queer Network Program; City of LGBTQ communities Seattle LGBT Commission; Entre Hermanos; FIRE Entertainment; Gay City; Ingersoll Gender Center; Green Bodies; LGBTQ Access Project of King County Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Abuse; Northwest Network of Bi, Trans, Lesbian, and Gay Survivors of Abuse; Queer Youth Space; ROOTS Young Adult Shelter; Seattle Counseling Services; YouthCare - Orion Center Abu-Bakr Mosque; Horn of Africa Services; Somali Community Services of Seattle; Iglesia La Luzdel Mundo; Iglesia Cristo Misionera East African and Hispanic communities
One America CONTRACTED PARTNER Peoples Harm Reduction Alliance CONVENER Public Defender Association CONTRACTED PARTNER Safe Futures Youth Center CONTRACTED PARTNER Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority CONTRACTED PARTNER SeattleKing County Coalition on Homelessness CONTRACTED PARTNER
Drug users; disproportionately young, homeless/street involved, people of color; many with criminal records King County Department of Public Defense Adults and youth involved in criminal justice system Southeast Asian and East African youth; Lao/Mien youth and adults; Cambodian adults Helping Link Chinese and Vietnamese living and working in Chinatown/International District and Little Saigon areas
Catholic Community Services/Catholic Housing Homeless community and those with mental health and Services; Chief Seattle Club, Compass Housing chemical dependency issues Alliance, ETS-REACH; Operation Nightwatch; Plymouth Housing Group; Real Change News; Sacred Heart Shelter; Seattle Mennonite Church/ Lake City Task Force on Homelessness
Sojourner Technical Services CONTRACTED PARTNER Teen Feed CONTRACTED PARTNER
APRI, Life Enrichment Bookstore; Mothers for Police Accountability, United Indians of All Tribes Foundation New Horizons Ministries; Sanctuary Arts Center; Seattle Public Library-University District; Street Youth Ministries; YouthCare; University District Youth Center Street-involved and homeless youth and young adults
37
APPENDIX A
Targeted Groups
Therapeutic Health Services CONTRACTED PARTNER
Atlantic Street Center; Cappys Boxing Gym; Center Those with mental health and chemical dependency for Wooden Boats; Cherry Hall AA; DADS Program; issues Seattle Parks and Recreation; South Lake High School, Street Light Media Productions; Seattle Youth Violence Prevention Initiative; Southwest Youth and Family Services; Powerful Voices; You Grow Girl; YMCA of Greater Seattle; Rainier Beach High School; Rainier Vista Boys and Girls Club; SPS Interagency Schools
Union Gospel Mission CONVENER Vietnamese Friendship Association CONTRACTED PARTNER Seattle World School; youth and jobs programs
Homeless community (residents), staff, urban youth, and our young adult interns Asian/Pacic Islander, Latino/Hispanic, East African, Muslim and Caucasian youth, immigrants/refugees
38
Appendix B: Community Meetings
39
APPENDIX B
Date 7-Oct 7-Oct 8-Oct 8-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 9-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 10-Oct 11-Oct 11-Oct 11-Oct 11-Oct 12-Oct 12-Oct 12-Oct 12-Oct 12-Oct 13-Oct 13-Oct 13-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct
Event/Location Queer Youth Space Therapeutic Health Services Entre Hermanos Gareld Teen Life Center Belltown Community Council, Belltown Community Center ROOTS Young Adult Shelter Seattle Municipal Court Street Youth Ministries Teen Feed Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Central District Council, Central Area Senior Center Chinese Information and Service Center Downtown District Council, Securities Building Plymouth Housing Group - Simons Apartments SafeFutures Youth Center Starbucks Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Centerstone LEAD Diversion Program LEAD Diversion Program Teen Feed Life Enrichment Bookstore Rainier Beach Community Center Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Washington Hall Mount Zion Baptist Church Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services East District Council, Capitol Hill Library Gareld Teen Life Center Gareld Teen Life Center
Address 911 E Pike St 2301 S Jackson St 1505 Broadway 420 - 23rd Ave 415 Bell St 1415 NE 43rd St 600 - 5th Ave 4540 - 15th Ave NE 4740 University Way NE 4740 University Way NE 2301 S Jackson St 500 - 30th Ave S 611 S Lane St 1904 - 3rd Ave 2133 - 3rd Ave 6337 35th Ave SW 2921 MLK Way S 4740 University Way NE 2301 S Jackson St 722 - 18th Ave 2133 - 3rd Ave 2133 - 3rd Ave 4740 University Way NE 5023 Rainier Ave S 4600 - 38th Ave S 4740 University Way NE 2301 S Jackson St 153 14th Ave 1634 - 19th Ave 4740 University Way NE 2301 S Jackson St 425 Harvard Ave E 420 - 23rd Ave 420 - 23rd Ave
Host Organization Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship Therapeutic Health Services Entre Hermanos Therapeutic Health Services Community Police Commission Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Teen Feed Teen Feed Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Community Police Commission Chinese Information and Service Center Community Police Commission Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness SafeFutures Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services G3 Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Teen Feed Sojourner Technical Services One America Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship G3 Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Community Police Commission Therapeutic Health Services Therapeutic Health Services
Attendance 30 8 17 14 14 20 3 20 40 10 7 19 23 7 15 8 4 10 5 8 1 1 10 50 30 10 4 7 300 10 14 16 21 14
40
APPENDIX B
Date 14-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct 14-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 15-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 16-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct
Event/Location House meeting House meeting Magnolia/Queen Anne District Council, Bayview Manor South Lake High School South Lake High School Teen Feed All Pilgrims Church Gay City House meeting International Terrace New Hope Baptist Church Real Change Sanctuary Arts Center Seattle Youth Violence Prevention Initiative, Cheeky Caf South Lake High School South Lake High School South Lake High School
Address South Seattle 10025 -15th Ave SW 11 West Aloha 8601 Rainier Ave S 8601 Rainier Ave S 4740 University Way NE 500 Broadway E 517 E Pike St 5020 - 35th Ave S 202 - 6th Ave S 124 - 21st Ave 96 S Main St 1604 NE 50th St 1700 S Jackson St 8601 Rainier Ave S 8601 Rainier Ave S 8601 Rainier Ave S
Host Organization Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Community Police Commission Therapeutic Health Services Therapeutic Health Services Teen Feed Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship Entre Hermanos Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Chinese Information and Service Center G3 Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness Teen Feed Community Police Commission Therapeutic Health Services Therapeutic Health Services Therapeutic Health Services Community Police Commission Teen Feed Teen Feed Teen Feed Teen Feed Asian Counseling and Referral Services Community Police Commission Chinese Information and Service Center Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship Teen Feed Teen Feed Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship SafeFutures Entre Hermanos Community Police Commission
Attendance 4 3 14 4 6 10 20 7 2 45 25 17 7 5 9 6 9 18 25 10 3 30 54 12 51 7 40 10 23 28 10 11 9 20
SPD Southeast Asian Advisory Group, 7101 - 38th Ave S Peter Claver House Street Youth Ministries Teen Feed University District Library University District Youth Center Asian Counseling and Referral Services Delridge District Council, Youngstown Cultural Arts Center Nihonmachi Terrace Queer Youth Space Teen Feed Teen Feed University Congregational Church Cherry Hall City Hall Elizabeth House Senior Center Entre Hermanos 4540 - 15th Ave NE 4740 University Way NE 5009 Roosevelt Way NE 4516 - 15th Ave NE 3639 MLK Jr Way S 4408 Delridge Way SW 651 S Main St 911 E Pike St 4740 University Way NE 4740 University Way NE 4515 - 16th Ave NE 2701 E Cherry St 600 - 4th Ave 3201 SW Graham St 1505 Broadway
Race and Social Justice Roundtable, 611 - 12th Ave S Seattle Indian Health Board
41
APPENDIX B
Date 17-Oct 17-Oct
Event/Location Rainier Beach Community Center Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness General Meeting, YMCA Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services YMCA Asian Counseling and Referral Services New Horizons Ministries Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services YouthCare Orion Center Abu-Bakr Mosque Abu-Bakr Mosque Elizabeth House Senior Center First A.M.E. Church Miller Community Center Neighborhood House - Rainier Vista Center SafeFutures Youth Center SafeFutures Youth Center Teen Feed Victor Steinbrueck Park Neighbors Night Club Sea Mar Community Care Center Teen Feed Asian Counseling and Referral Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services LEAD Diversion Program Southside Commons Tabernacle Missionary Baptist Church Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services
Address 4600 - 38th Ave S 2820 E Cherry St
Host Organization Teen Feed Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness
Attendance 16 25
17-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct 17-Oct 18-Oct 18-Oct 18-Oct 18-Oct 18-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 19-Oct 20-Oct 20-Oct 20-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct 21-Oct
SPD African American Advisory Group 2120 S Jackson St 4740 University Way NE 1901 MLK Jr Way S 909 4th Ave 3639 MLK Jr Way S 2709 - 3rd Ave 4740 University Way NE 1901 MLK Jr Way S 1828 Yale Ave 5511 MLK Jr Way S 5511 MLK Jr Way S 3201 SW Graham St 1522 14th Ave SW 330 - 19th Ave E 4410 -29th Ave S 6337 35th Ave SW 6337 35th Ave SW 4740 University Way NE 2001 Western Ave 1509 Broadway 1040 S Henderson St 4740 University Way NE 3639 MLK Jr Way S 3639 MLK Jr Way S 3639 MLK Jr Way S 2133 - 3rd Ave 3518 S Edmunds St 2801 S Jackson St 4740 University Way NE 1901 MLK Jr Way S
Sojourner Technical Services Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Therapeutic Health Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Teen Feed Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services Teen Feed G3 One America SafeFutures G3 G3 Chinese Information and Service Center SafeFutures SafeFutures Teen Feed Karen Studders Entre Hermanos KKMO/Sea Mar Teen Feed Asian Counseling and Referral Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Racial Disparity Project and Public Defender Association Entre Hermanos / LGBTQ Allyship G3 Teen Feed Therapeutic Health Services
9 10 18 20 14 20 10 53 20 8 26 11 60 19 18 10 4 10 25 11 35 10 8 4 7 2 30 25 10 17
42
APPENDIX B
Date 21-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 22-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 23-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct
Event/Location Therapeutic Health Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Bush Asian Center Chief Seattle Club Cristo Misionera Evangelical Church DVA Apartment Building Sanctuary Arts Center Seattle Public Library University District Seattles Union Gospel Mission South Lake High School South Park Senior Center Street Youth Ministries Teen Feed University District Youth Center 2013 Networking Conuence Centro De La Raza Duwamish District Council, Georgetown City Hall Helping Link Northwest District Council, Greenwood Senior Center Rainier Beach Community Center SeaTac Community Center Seattle Youth Violence Prevention Initiative (Case Managers) Southeast District Council, Rainier Beach Community Center SPD Filipino Advisory Group, Filipino Community Center Asian Counseling and Referral Services Black Law Student Union Des Moines Senior Center Helping Link Josephinum Apartments
Address 1901 MLK Jr Way S 3639 MLK Jr Way S 409 Maynard Ave 410 - 2nd Ave Ext 610 SW Roxbury St 721 S Lane St 1604 NE 50th St 5009 Roosevelt Way NE 3800 S Othello St 8601 Rainier Ave S 8201 - 10th Ave S 4540 - 15th Ave NE 4740 University Way NE 4516 - 15th Ave NE 5001 25th Ave NE 2524 - 16th Ave S 6202 - 13th Ave S 1032 S Jackson St 525 N 85th Ave 4600 - 38th Ave S 13735 - 24th Ave S 1620 - 18th Ave 4600 - 38th Ave S 5740 MLK Jr Way S 3639 MLK Jr Way S 4293 Memorial Way 2045 S 216th St 1032 S Jackson St 1902 - 2nd Ave
Host Organization Therapeutic Health Services Asian Counseling and Referral Services Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness One America Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority Teen Feed Teen Feed Union Gospel Mission Therapeutic Health Services KKMO/Sea Mar Therapeutic Health Services Teen Feed Teen Feed Teen Feed Karen Studders KKMO/Sea Mar Community Police Commission Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority / Helping Link Community Police Commission Therapeutic Health Services KKMO/Sea Mar Community Police Commission Community Police Commission Community Police Commission Asian Counseling and Referral Services G3 KKMO/Sea Mar Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority / Helping Link Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness
Attendance 5 18 9 80 50 20 9 0 30 20 30 40 20 10 15 70 25 9 14 10 20 15 11 12 20 11 20 20 14 25
Southwest Youth and Family Services 2103 S Atlantic St
43
APPENDIX B
Date 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 24-Oct 25-Oct 25-Oct 25-Oct 25-Oct 26-Oct 26-Oct 26-Oct 27-Oct 28-Oct 28-Oct
Event/Location Rainier Beach Community Center South Park Community Center SPD East African Advisory Council, Yesler Community Center SPD East Precinct Advisory Council, Seattle University Chardin Hall United Indians of All Tribes Daybreak Star Black Student Union at Seattle University Helping Link South Lake High School YouthBuild, Seattle Community College - Georgetown Campus Black Catholics of ICC, Immaculate Conception Church Lee House at New Holly Seattle World School Mount Zion Baptist Church Central Area Senior Center SPD South Crime Prevention Council, SoutheastSeattle Senior Center Franklin High School Seattle Public Library - Central Library SPD Muslim, Sikh, Arab Advisory Group, Yesler Community Center SPD Ofcers - Guild Ofce Cleveland High School La Luz Del Mundo Evangelical Church Through individual appointments with clients Through individual contacts with clients Total Meetings: 151+
Address 4600 - 38th Ave S 8319 - 8th Ave S 917 E Yesler Way 1020 East Jefferson St 3801 West Government Way 500 - 30th Ave 1032 S Jackson St 8601 Rainier Ave S 6737 Corson Ave S 820 - 18th Ave 7315 - 39th Ave S 301 - 21st Ave E 1634 - 19th Ave 500 - 30th Ave S 4655 S Holly
Host Organization Sojourner Technical Services KKMO/Sea Mar Community Police Commission Community Police Commission Sojourner Technical Services G3 Seattle Chinatown/ID Preservation and Development Authority / Helping Link Asian Counseling and Referral Services Community Police Commission G3 One America Vietnamese Friendship Association G3 G3 Community Police Commission
Attendance 15 25 2 16 35 20 2 6 18 15 34 136 100 20 12
29-Oct 29-Oct 30-Oct 30-Oct 31-Oct 31-Oct Various Various
3013 S Mt Baker Blvd 1000 - 4th Ave 917 E Yesler Way 2949 4th Ave S 5511 - 15th Ave S 4515 Rainier Ave S Various Various
Asian Counseling and Referral Services Seattle King County Coalition On Homelessness Community Police Commission Community Police Commission Asian Counseling and Referral Services One America Downtown Emergency Services Center Peoples Harm Reduction Alliance Total Attendance:
19 10 0 45 6 45 234 50 3,406
44
Appendix C: Collateral Material
45
APPENDIX C
Escuch s ta ! e n y opini diferencia. la r a rc a m

Sida looga qeybgalo:
m gia : Magkomento o magb igay ng mga Mag-sign up sa Nu g k nhn suhestiyon para emailn kin n Faalo ka bixi ama talo ka soo jeedi listse CPC em sa mga paksa rv ng CPC ail dapat g gp ti listservsiyasa sa OCPC ti a nhng ch o isyu @sea na hoc ca ch ttle.gov ch OCPC@ tinng mowduucyada ama arrimaha loo ng CPC (o . hoc vn xut v OCPC@seattle.go ng magp sea adala xem xt ttlekome v Isku qor liiska emailka CPS, booga .iriso mga Truy cp trc Mag-o .gov. nto at suhes nline sa (ho CPC baahan yahay in CPC c gi th n m CPC nn websi CPC te tiyon ng www. CPC sa tuyn tran sa qua PO Boxg9474 ch internetka OCPC@seattle.gov. g ng ng bu web 9, seatt ti ti a Seattle, WA 9812 le.gov (ama boostada ku soo dir faalada iyo ca in n POgp v xut /polic ch Seattle, 4-474 ecom CPC www.sea gov ww eat mission: Makip 9). /police Box 94749, WA 981 WA PO ttle. . P ag-ugnay Magh Gal internetka, bogga CPC Box 94749, Seattle, tle. sa amin OCPC@seattle.gov O commissio w.s talooyinka: Box 94749, Seattle, WA 24anap 4749). ng CPC gov/polic impor upang Lin h vi n:agpul ecommission: on tungkol makip masy (PO Box Tm th . sa www.seattle.gov/policecommission: ong ang mga kinata mga pagpu chng ti 98124-4749). 98124-4749 CPC ng tin v cc pulong s din CPC wan ngcCPC CPC ng ngh cc cu erencia sa na iyong bukas sa publik c hp gp g 4-4749 t ch pangk e sug WA 9812 CPC CPC Seattle, i vi nhm o env c trongng OCPC@s o at suriin upang s CPC s at, CPC Hel macluumaad ku saabsan shirarka 94749, www.seattle. o CPC ent Nala soo xariir is wakiilada ula kulmaan CPC eattle.go ario mag v as v cn , ang mga 206-233xu alok ca eattle.go mga g ideya xt 2664 blem katitik t kin ng v xem OCPC@s qu v, ho bin bn cu kung paano namin an ng pagpupulon o pro lice com su Rea www.sea temas . : (o CPC u furan dadweynaha iyo iri tip cn cc masv cch chng c e ee kooxdaada, ama si aad u soo jeedisid krado policecom mahu ttle.gov/ g. c hp gov/policecommission env say . na rela adas con mission ar maab ti c th cn cion ot ang mga miyem Suriin Xem xt ti gbro investig .) qoraalada ng tt laga sameyay shirarka. eo a ku saabsan sida wanaagsan loolamga xariiri ng komunidad. materyales liu v nh crarse: hn. sa ee ang CPC debera CPC por corr ttle.gov/ tungk la ol www.sea ng xut que i chnh 4749). CPC Cmo involu sugerencia laga sch thay Lin h bulshada. sa mga ipinapanukalang de listas . pagba idor 24Fiiri qoraalada sameyay talooyinka karo xubnaha entario o Sea WA 981 CPC bago SPD serv com n ttle, patak ch stro mmissio aran. n Hon tt bn g ti en nue policeco rCPC .gov. cita Box 94749, s laga soo jeediyay isbaddalada. g cu hi trc PO a soli Inscrbase C@seattle Hi par Sagut OCP n ch CPC otro en an ng g ang isang online ti v cch Maki tuyn ca Cnh St con nos rena en Nala soo xariir de la CPC se Cng n pag-u ci thin CPC unquese CPC OC Dhamaystir suaalaha internetka ee ku gnay sa questionnaire tungkca SPD de la CPC PC@seattle : Com . hot n de g Seattle amin nte de la sion SPD sitio web ol sa v mi quan acerca g Guddiga Boliiska Bulshada Seattle ssaabsan .gov, 206 Seatt representa licecommis idea paano le g Ingrese al Comm h cn sida loo hagaajiyo dhaqanka 206-233-2664 papaghusayin ang kung OCPC@seattle.gov, que un w.seat -233-2664 Police . tle.gov/po ng.unity ww para sugerir stra llegada a los tle.ission Comm mga gov/police las OCPC@seattle.gov, 206-233-2664 kasanayan at ugnay www.seat OCPC@seattle.g su grupo o PO ecommission SPD iyo xariirka bulshada. nue Box 94749, Seattle, www.seattle.gov/polic commissio cin sobre de la con ov, 206-233-26 emos mejorar informa n komunidad ng SPD. an sa lico www.seattle.gov/policecommission 64 WA 98124-4 www.seattle.go 749 al pb Obtenga abiertas cmo pod v/policecommis comunidad. H la es i de de . nion s ros sion ng cam k reu uta miemb se las min -2664 t kim sot CPC y revi es. SPD os v, 206-233 eattle.go c hiu qu de mmission con nosotr e OCPC@s ados dad las reunion policeco ues uni cion ttle.gov/ nq rela Com , www.sea les cng bng Comu de Polica de la materia a el -233-2664 . stos par . Revise los propue .gov, o 206 sion Comisin C@seattle . mis con cambios Seattle OCP gov/policecom in policial tle. io plan de acc cuestionar www.seat www.seat . e nuestro mejorar las tle.gov/po o Complet cm re lice es sob com CPC cion a mission www.seattle.gov/policeco www.seattle.g600 en lne las rela 600 Fourth Fourth Avenue, ov/p Seattle, WA 98104 olice mmissio Avenue, Seat del SPD y 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 600 Fourth Avenue comm n SPCbrochu issio tle, WA , Seattle, prcticas unidad. Traditionaln re090513_V WA 98104Ammaankena. Chinese 98104 Waan isku icanahay. Somali www.seattle.gov/policecommission Magaaladena, Boliiskena, I.indd 2-3 Vietnamese Tagalog con la com
L P Sidee ayaan m a th a n o ta y ono C h n g o t Pa i m c ki s ki h ng l ga n n n g an n Waa la C maqli doonaa g g g iy on h u ea g ki gawa nta to g n csamaynaa a qu bo v, v iu g se n s, at u ga ga s w codkaada, waxayna ku a o n s y nn s tha l m m a n e n r s ? cdoontaa kh ito ng isbaddal? c bi pa p u yeelan gbabag agbabag y i? . ss t! saamayn! o o! ? rem a
cambio?
Paano sumali:
Cng heli karaa oo keliya marka bulshada iyo boliiska Maa ch g ch ari sib lang mangyar le i ang n c totong kalig thn ng cng lo es po thpub tasa wada t s . shaqeyaan. ng kap p blica so ag magtutulung nto likoan ton v conju c en an ang nh . kh jan kom ra seguridad ba unid de vi tra t c ad c a at s rda ang lic ve ng v puli La i nhau sya. phi hp l i y la po ad . nid mu co m cuando la
Cch tha Dhab
ahaan, ammaanka dadweynaha waxaa la
o?
Brochures were produced in seven languages.
Naninindigan ang Komisyon sa mah Guddiga waxaa dhab ka ah in ay si wanaagsan u qabato na pag usay at patas pup ulisya. hawsha boliiska iyo in ay dhowrto cadaaladda.
ncia policial n una vigila 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104 rometida co n est comp www.seattle.gov/policecommission 98104 La Comisi 600 Fourth Avenue, Seattle, WA ecaz y justa. attle.gov/policecommission
SPCbrochure090513_TCH.indd
Korean
2-3
Simplified Chinese
SPCbrochure0905
SPCbrochure090513_SO.indd 2-3
www.se
SPCbrochure090513_SCH.indd 2-3
juntos. 13_TL.indd 2-3 a. Mejor . . polic . d. Nuestra . segu rida ad. Nuestra Nuestra ciud 10/16/13 4:59 PM PM /13 5:08
10/16
10/16/13 5:10 PM
Ating lungsod. Ating kaligtasan.
10/16/13 4:33 PM
10/16/13 5:03 PM
Thnh ph Ating pulisya. Mas ca chng maganda kung sama-sa ta. S an ton ma. ca chng ta. Cnh st ca chng ta. Cng nhau
10/16/13 5:05 PM
SPCbrochure090513_KO.indd
ww
SPCbrochu
.gov/p w.seattle
S.indd 2-3
olicecomm
2-3
ission
600 Four
Seattle, th Avenue,
WA 98104
Spanish
tin b.
10/16/13
4:27 PM
re090513_E
Creating change that will endure

What do we want to change?
The City of Seattle established the Community Police Commission (CPC) to provide community input on proposed Seattle Police Department (SPD) reforms. The CPC was mandated under a memorandum of understanding between the City and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) which details work to be done over three years to ensure bias-free policing and address the past use of excessive force. The CPC plays a key role in the reform efforts. The CPCs charge is to represent a broad range of community perspectives and to reach out and engage communities directly, to get critical feedback, and to then recommend changes to SPD policies and practices. It gives community members a voice and stake in the reform process. The CPC is depending on community involvement over the long haulcommunity perspective is needed in the short-term on suggested changes, but we also need to know if changes SPD makes really work. CPC will foster that dialogue over time which CPC believes will also build trust and strengthen community-police relations. CPC recommendations are intended to: Ensure police services comply with the Constitution, and the laws of Washington and the United States Increase the effectiveness of the police accountability system Promote public confidence in SPD
Members of the CPC were appointed by the Mayor and conrmed by the City Council. They represent the diversity of Seattle and include people from communities of color, ethnic and faith communities, immigrant communities, the urban Indian community, the lesbian/gay/ bisexual/transgender community, civil rights advocates, the business community, individuals familiar with the challenges faced by those with mental illness or substance abuse issues, and youth. One member is from the Seattle Police Ofcers Guild and one is from the Seattle Police Management Association. CPC members live or work in all ve Seattle police precincts. The CPC works closely with other agencies to promote reform, develop policy recommendations and ensure accountability. Key partners include SPD and other agencies and departments of the City of Seattle, the Court-appointed Monitor who oversees the settlement agreement, and the DOJ. The CPC works independently of its partners and will incorporate community perspectives in its nal policy recommendations.
Who is participating?
The CPC will arrange meetings with a wide range of community and faith organizations, neighborhood and youth groups, and with key partner agencies to talk about possible reforms. Many discussions will be sponsored by community partners engaged by the CPC to gather critical insight from communities particularly affected by police practices. Meaningful conversations with Seattles diverse communities and institutional stakeholders are essential.
CPC and partners in reform
CPC members:
Our community
The CPC needs your help to create a stronger, safer and more connected community. All Seattle residents who have a stake in better policing are invited to share their thoughts about improving SPD practices and their ideas on how to build trust between Seattles diverse communities and SPD.
46
APPENDIX C
Fall 2013
True Connecting our communities and the Seattle Police Department public The 2010 shooting death by Seattle police of First Nations woodcarver John T. Williams, a series of other serious incidents involving police and people of color, ignited safety and public concern about excessive use of force and bias in the Seattle Police Department (SPD). After a federal investigation, the City of Seattle signed a settlement agreement can only with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to reform SPD practices. A memorandum of understanding details the work to be done and also mandated the establishment of the happen Seattle Community Police Commission (CPC) to provide community input on the SPD reform process and reform proposals. Policy changes will be made to ensure that police in Seattle comply with the Constitution, and the laws of Washington and the when the services United States. In addition to recommending changes in police practices, the CPC will also the need to improve the Citys police accountability system and work to promote community assess public condence in SPD. and police The CPC is reaching out broadly to the people of Seattle to discuss needed reforms. During October 2013, in meetings throughout the city with Seattle residents, the CPC wants to what it will take to improve trust and respect between the community and SPD, and work hear to understand how SPD can improve its relations with community members. The CPC also wants to learn if policy recommendations under consideration make sense and if any together. changes should be made to them.
CPC members:
Fact Sheets were produced in seven languages.
Claudia DAllegri Lisa Daugaard, Co-Chair Bill Hobson Jay Hollingsworth Kate Joncas a Seattle Bulshad Joseph Kessler Boliiska ! Guddiga hay ana fiica attle Se isku ad an Wa , Diane Narasaki, Co-Chair iiskena ka Bulsh ena, Bol Boliis ank ma , Am Guddiga ena nahay! Commissioners lad gaa (Comisin de isku fiica Ma Nuestra ciud iiskena, Waan Tina Podlodowski Polica de la ad. Nuestra nkena, Bol (Co 2013 mis Comunidad Nuestra ciud in seg a, Ammaa tl e 2013 urid Pol aaladen Se ad.de at 13 ica ad. Nuestra Nue 20 de Seattle) de a stra Magof la g bah Com pol The CPC consists 15 members appointed by segurid Oto individuals familiar with the challenges faced boo ica uni n o de 201 . Qa Me ad. Nuestra dad o ga Marcel Purnell jor iy de . jun ng 3 Bilow tos n b poli na Oto . Seattle) C 3 ti o ca. de t 201 au de 2013 najaarka or juntos. . ha aha nh ls oob ng 2013 Mej Qab nh S bu C da with mental illness . wga iyo C ta. 2013 sha da Bilo g a the Mayor and conrmed by the City Council. La g by those or substance ma n en rid dhi ve ch a C . ad Se2010 say . tle iisk rd John T. Williams m arka bey bol ad at 2013 La o naja Jennifer Shaw Hi n g ta. Cnh iin st caIsku xe da bulsh dam 2010 John T. Williams er re ve yah kaa la ashadaC lee rd ee m ci ka rid 0 ad dhim lug leh o on a ay a xe a 201 iis tle of re n, (SPD) beys er . kun ar boliiska kii lac aus, ol n dhaafk dam . aa B nad a ka ahiin Isku Seat ion xad a ch nu san leey ee ah el ar ka 0 c (SPD) lug cul leh Members represent the diversity Seattle sida e abuse issues, and youth. One member is ttle es a ee xd n ha b n 201 Se fka 13 a kal n, liis kun a Sea tra kii bsa . haa nu to 20 s, aa ka a at alk aa Bo el nad (DOJ) saa ka bsan s iisk se culu xadd estra W oyin san tle a Se rid ee bol co sida federaPolic gu ttle cdo S an D Dhab ah o ku at D) en kale m Sea rug rka s dha se aaxd ka ste tle ka (SP un co Kevin Stuckey mu ma iska raaldib gu W oyin ban gey ad y ku saa kan bolims Po ng ta. id m llia (DOJ) fede cdo e ay rid koo urta rey ii ugo ka a ch un Wi ad At dha teen lic SPD De Kad ka ad a 20 Ma abu T. mur mar had nka ida ban e es nk 2010 John n pa da T. Williams Po dib (SPD).a ane s ay geys 10 gas g lung eyka koo De urta ayku de lad Kadttle J)Sea Joh con Ating in ka rt aa adii Too Mar lic ph c pa nah Po D). nkapeople netax daa iyo m ash ku abu m a a wey co and include from communities of color, (SP rtm from the Seattle Police Ofcers Guild and taxa lic en Cad aa ay Toog sod. At nah 20 a ttle(DO a daaladd iyos, de n liam dad a , tt m da t Thnh am wey en (CPC) SPD iisk Sea Cad 10 le ay axd ay Wil SPD (D ams de sha lun dad Se T. Bol t p Wa am xda iska ada wax ay Willi n a ara ep (D (SPD) gsod. T. Se Boli at Waa ing ka p hay bl waxn, afg Seat Joht axd , ysa ep ay xda tle ic John gas bli La Wa a dda ysan ar ta da afgarash ar la a tle Ating say abe mue ay del La da ca ) SPD a Waa la gash abe rqa Tagl ta qad m mue bixi hiis mid ) bixis rte eex en hiis t mid eexd m War so SPD Rev. Harriett20 Walden . ku rte .so ka lo hes ka hes ch r ku iyo kaligtas ligtasan. iyo ha ha S arWa ag del lo ay n ay Tagla dad ga to talli dad ma (CPC) gga to tallis na b amm h iyo sta na ka wax am xoog iyo (DOJ) en de ay SPD xoo M qanka SPD ta ttle wax ey n de dotio y ay ns gasas qan Ating de ttle 2013 y nati an. At nati kaca wax de Sea ado la egsa wax dw a M iyo dha hab vo ethnic and faith communities, immigrant vo ka one is from the Seattle Police Management poli C 2013 dalo dha polic o egs ade a Sea dw 2010 ame Na iyo aaa ame da aalada bato eeyo ing pu CPC o la dal loo aloo ade glad to hab pulis a bad st a rica rican dhii de de da sam ee eey 13 u nm S bad iba gaa n loo Fir n, Mag la ar no Joh Sea ri Sea o John uga in ga dhi Ma nh ey lisya. ee le aa ttle y es ritaa ttle i la (Seattl loo si wax loog ladsam la pers SPD v SPD n kra loo v wax an, pers enwax uga T. att J) yaha en T. es Ma th ayin Willi ona 201 aa la rita Will ad dda a g ona 201 Mas ma ya. Mas m st n (DO eyay baa ay han n po ams si ssde 0y la h iam kr asa n had po g g ice) baa 0 J) yah e Po P st Sesam yt baa Dwax de P SPD una sib com acn ay y una colo siya s(S ea buls la cn h T. sib com dda colo a (DO SP eya a loo han iyo da serieseri a rasa n xa of Just ttle )qad lada le aganda lc gen gand o con la C) si g o r gen lic ka, da le sha baa g sam dda con Rev. Aaron Williams erar m tice de el secu (CP v wa -u men g e sha T. e cia Po siya tuur prej m do bul serio erar de an on sec loo el -u ttle aa enc a kung part an ng De si u a tirta Das uicio lic (CPC) SPD prej a. Isba preo uen qu on sseri the Sea , iyo ia (De C) ms C) gaa CPC a incid d g ala ede aqad tafa add u ax uici nt pa os preo cup del SP rka kung bad communities, urban Indian community, the gy maanIsb Association. CPC members live or work in all De n llia (CP n had sJus lin los inci ente o (CP w add dala g aci SPD iska sha tme rtm de ayaa cup tuu cof del nsa D c cn sama ay disp a Wi den pa g Buls c D ar ttle s SP los n par aci (Sea que SPD vi reen en tirta Das aros T. ka boli en tes ra rtm ya de SP wax CPC 2013 n 10 disp , da. iska a D Sea c hog samai (De laen S gaa n invo ttle n an v una qan -sama sa u tafa (Se que com t, Boli i hn ng an aros ra da aad en g xy y a e bsa de isla Polic lucr a ma dha attle ttle ri inve la Jo SD unid ba invo dal diga cu sha ka una saa a n ra t, aron ka c , aya iisk S com e nsa Sea stiga g SPD s Cng K a i n ad n Dep ku Poli tt . Gud SDP) e bad kh sama. xarii u of P) btan ch an bol inve lin aa , lucr unid sobr gaa kaiiska Bul da iska ti cin an cu ree artmartm ce Dep la aron uro lm saa ka SPD ng le n ng stig do wax polic ee la boli a tra oyin e ad a t hog fede khc g gaa ent, a n la-xi an el c ay ku aci a u iyo qan g tr a sob la abu talo aJust g Bol uso tt la ra ral,ral, la P CPC Dep bsa inisla y a ng m n fede do re i poli dha egya ttleamk ti exce i th Pin ice, labta m o ent, arta (Currently there are dig el saa le of ka ade ca tro Ciud hi c lagu talliy iira nka SPD lm nida Sea . n uso Dep sivo lic ati Jus men in i a la o ku i Dep a g h Gud y cu xar o ng ad lada ng arta SPD tice nd g de exc add to c ka la u la ng a aajiy iisk de arta sad a P CPC uro cc e lm la dda de men Ciud i isaa , esiv aan Dep Sa o a vi lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender ee bol ng fuer hub c oyin to an keliy men Seattle police precincts. Pin Polic t k m SPD la hag to ka qab o de la-x ).bad D adSea ttle CPC . Isbacommunity, i ku za loo arta quoo la abu de Just talo om iyay ada to a ku .ve Joh to li si ci ka de o in yla rm Un e PD a de indala SPD SPD ma men g de tall iyo egy Sea ind c qab mem naa fuer p Sea nat (S n u nah eyka Poli aam icia) t lot s SPD un ci cht tay a t m to ) da T. loo ttle ade inkao u doo a e ttle) g lag za wey le CPC 2013 10 SPD Mar (D ca nid orn i (D acu co . de de . in Wi an OJ m SP SP n ng y rt m rm to H Un ayn . dad da iyo Sau hida erdo de Jus ep att los iyo k ep dum Des m llia vacancies on the (D SPD id D v han da D mem ida ala D baa Sea ton sam ticia m Esta chng two aaj crea ka ln , art pu aad sad Se lp un con o ar un SPD de D ms Jo to kin baa K hil y oon t am e ttle) hingth ka add dos s cin de la gan ap orn dal hag acu entendimient ) de los tm co a me d el e hub nh hn ida SP asa d S keliy kals da sa doonto nom Isb DOJ a loo . Des p qabaan Unid at n erdo n bad Ho 2010 ng mu da, dum CPC en loo m ntan lig in la on da Was eyn inta nh pat san add T. ay ka. (Dep u a tm os c CPC g Esta o dala crea pu un con a ku CPC of g 20 de gb mar C para qiim W t ta kan n si artm rt gku of 10 dag o deta dos s qab Ph th cin naa ente arilJu el n nah Ju sharciya (Com illi ka id bad horu S rey sa ka refo id ent sob DOJ sa 10 da Sea tan Uni u loo T yo sti CPC doo in am t ndim de ad vo nm wey ar oo lla Ma dad ng rma laan ng mun a er dos kin ttle sti , . qee hil . (De ce el ran la B ng 13 a m ayn r k ng at ci dad iyo hay had hid i civil rights advocates, the business community, ient isa . tro ity trab s dhe las CPC para . e sha . ce para part , a c h as 20 g Police Com a d at s saye han ng ser on doo no v o deta pu prc ajo . yees DO baa ng, pu sam n iyo n nid men apo aa sii as ay uga refo lig commission) ngt trn para real lisy baa c c thnh kin g on lala in laga DO CPC 2013 10 pa ta Sea nto si gga J) ar rtarda mm y soo wax (C t pa lla an rma oo iyo pe oonida a loo Dv n xp lis J) gat ttle gb ttle del kal la(Co unit qu miss el om mi dashi del gk r ticas (C deral opin c hi y kals izars 20 d SPn trab ta ng sa Seatt t las para y o oo idil vWa t an ion, pu SPD eyn mg la aala ch c ngi thu mu ut Poli om ka Sea in ada ng eik prc ajo aad so n s th il da arin 10 iba ng gan y aajiy Com st apo ng . ce Mag dad de a a po tam qiim na rciy ng Los dal SPD SPD a para nit pu s br um rka bl aala tica m h tr hag thu dag tao , la Com pa rtar isin c bin iska rtaa cam sha h we lic an pa n ka com ng y bad at le hor un xarii s a mag loo CPC ka isa real ng mg ng cn del la ngng kasam n .o boli ng mis vi Po si xarii de Polic bios en estip gsi yo po kay Fir rsa a unidad sobr del tayla g hag ity opin ar y izar adn ca c o se dad , ,CP,CCom pu kart laa v n sion ula t tho nto iba CPC lic er ng siy y las pa Sea qab ula SPD qee h in at in m c v tn Po lis doo se ka g a mapu a de c lsh aajin asat, nila la m ttle aran y a an gg an pa st tio ka sha de dc tam Co ya Los polt rye lic dan a sha ar lagu cum e lag pe CP bala uga g lahng Com la yee bu t lis am u had la com gp pa oyin wax isi el bin si dhe lala i ti icas cam qaa geU.S e aa lic shir g cc a iyo at ay plan proc de an n de C ay lala SP in qu m ku 3, SPD ki ch gsii it sia Co unid se nid i, an bios esti n ng sa p wax dii talo eso le k g unid ig m con ay iss raed gdaan D. iyo ng CPC 201 realizar CP Poli sida . mm y SeNa pula ttle ad) iba mpu soo hadoo sa u r, o ga cp y pang aC Sea l la en la ad Depa i nh inta ion wo ca idil CPC las o rn g pa Din ca to na kal de uu m Con h b mto m oba las lad attlens Sea b Se sob ttle reco ng ato prop oo ta pa n de SPD SPD issC) stitu ng Lung iyo Seatt i nh trn faha pol ka ade para re tra att Okto we g-a gaa lik cu pa oga CP cum rtm ag men . on uest la ka bara ii l hag ay ng . Ng eta el aaj cin tica ay lad ion ka le Com as leye Ma dad rver gara inba alamng yayari gs m b kay od dar rsa plan proc as en, g in dda wax Bish K a ka tu o ) lye Po y las iirk sa y. de a tos ay na ay gaa ntiza cam unid isi ,at seCP iba t of , iyo jan eso th tht Thnh Ph iisk con sod xar lice in refo CP ma loo PC m . real in isba ng First tu ya yaha Ho biosla r que ad) k SPDa bol din to aa si y serv xar rma ida Justic nec ay rabt aan ang th tay las sC de y C) pa sa en isa ng v Dan iyo iirta Departmla ga mblik pu bo a yliis rela de Con lu deizar kar rabt esid Bn gh los an ula wax ang nto le (C n reco prop o h ha qab ala t, in Was ng cion SP gp Nations Se p stitu tha ng ad had u han yaha para g tra e (DO ton g doo CPC ng kalo men iyo ues nil n hing ado CPC att an me dedar a pa olan icios cin lag baadan aar U. SP ay ka iuls Seatt ttle, CP inp tas o buls s con mej ag ba tun thi ton gara i, an an le ang lah gta eng g ig looqaa mo bal rar wax bu S. polic u hag y las g nh J) up oyin shing D. Sea oraraaj de yan C xeys ut si ntiz C cam dii da las t (SP gko ci shi tat ja de sa ca SPD. pa ran ng iales CPC refo De wo talo ay el ar sa had Wa leye Di ku los 3, SPD an bios n polt ag l ng prom m ang ga da. ka dhe que du Seatisa cu rma dii nec iyo paD). de sa yaya 20 Esta ay pa ne wax ko s de ng ng CP icas en sa u 201 da h s c rela Ma hda sida ma ng kasun m ng over n vicng los l ah inta had mu Se g-aa dos 13 rtm a de y D. Palal g polic ar, to esid Was cion buls CPC de sc ng da gsa serv quu ad la de Unid Lu ato siste nid gka ta uu SP iales att con oob ato hing ko ados gimad aha en pa ri na odcarver tiu ba icio mac nh n ng tle bar wa os. ng tu lye adng Police duan co onsa an 10 le Okt ,g mej tossag oga ton g-u sms lu nh St C xubn t of 20 la vo Ade ka con atap m l resp y poli ay faham aw sowa za kuw Co tun nju hii CPC bilid orar y nhxush . mg ospu t ca tu na ng reporm pb ino. in a 13 aha de cial ng las t. Ch a din ino ay d sa dda mm wax Bis un ad gko Ju tam s ellica wa ng nt yahi ng los iyo es sa pag-a pol leed ng isa de10 ay De sk tay ay. prom sist , lu ci s an to isba bin sti la un en de La ng l liyo Esta an la in C p tica an id mg in ema lii ng rab sa t ng yah ay pa a a polic el CPC Se ce ity SPD eval c ove n g s ph tixge dos g SPD taa ay ay ad c an a ba xu ng pro poli C rtment la a tra de r uar est Po iyo o Hin Ph m ca bo SP pagta at pagb ga (D v D la SP .ut tas ng Wa g mg .resp Uni yah de la ayos bliko tung cial i cc da ses baat lice tin con em llega la D , CP dos karag ost OJ pSP es, dda hotle ciud m han co ons ana CP abag CPC waxthit. T o an n kaloo rabnecesar a kasan . inp iy ndo an or Co ) mm , ee la ad asa Ade ng da n. ng du abil za baa h C ay up an kol nj CPC (SPD). daga ttle gt isa siya g sa y trab ta SP Dla ms pb idad o vast so bulsha repm aa D v cc un shingta looias. wax an ni cn a tam g sa n Sea lica D os pa y iss xey ko ajar a dii SP de aya ey n orm SP cn sa g to n M . sect bin pa ng CPC en La ion sa c g m ton dhe din he . had t ga ga the D para c ag aq c n c En . g ores tak poli a el CPC eeyo Se ng eva pagreun kasund ng Pagkatap sa CP win at ng pu (CP octubre SPD at wa ci a ka n ln sa at ng Es attle ng vi CPC ca sh SP aran luar . de g est lleg ko ah iyo de Seattle, pa Clis mg shdada .pob laSP de sa C)nup CP cc khi ad lagu rekida le tun de la bul la hp th gd tu a pa ng ga up D C hmadd v sam laci 2013, ciud D omen ya y an ang wa os ng re n de m nuka ngkotados Co wada g sa aw man - uan sa o macquul en reun CPC la CPCando a vas po pinag . trab nec pa ng xubnaha ma Seatt C mu ng Sea h thc lm mg ma un o lun xus Lu v phi un da
Unidos unity m esarias. En quiere aver tos sec rm ngan sod ttle para tiyak na a la gb CPay l asa pr ng mg ajar ione an id m ga pa ng tra u iin kuw y i cc h st Thn ayang iga entre ga s que se h ph at ga attle th para tore lee,dah a ba hi o yah disc ang mg Po ilan kik la 13 la comunid octubre de iguar lo. CP pa s d orm ta oseso utir eliy sumusug rep pagbab de ay20 ilos real ba a ng ga mga ka g-aayos C gb s las ka tixg la izar e n ng de mie xut tha pob que se la D, refo ab upan a serlic ra CPC ad y el SPD 2013, en SP n Sea laci . ab rma ngSP ee ag ng con gd ag nod sa ho Wa 10 nm asa an t los ttle, cn nec n i dn Se mm ot s Ina g bisyoCo a hab ag o sanaya g pa dda D. da up re sh ilun . o sa esita de ng v ng a ng v itan sa y entender reun an mbr pa Sea n. CPC iss Konst cng ing thng mg n gh sad tes para CP Miembros ng pu osla pa rm ttle ione No usa sa de im ca quie a po ng g C de aa din mej n ng att n ng an para toda kasan ta on a at cng eeyo. an entricas la com n to de qu re ad. s. que itusyon, t gawin at orar yin la lisya ion a siya g ey p (CPC ka g Ok gpa ave at ng la e la que le tro disc ng. CPC polt kump gre lah an ciud unid u ra rigu con aya mga man trch nh ngiya utir com sa Se las CP tub g ad real at ng n ar lo lis an re hn na era else sis , n ng Se aq at unid up pinagupan La Es izar Se sh re C za ko n . an trng gi lagvi que tem refo pa attle.)Bil CPC nsa yya u sam est n SPD att 20 an ta tao el resp m n cng ng v c cn pulisy rma se ydo con nu n ad tam do a ng le, 13 en g pue el eval Lu g pa ng s sien los miembr nec de la CPC: sa s . etores bin SPD hab ka pa mna de , sa cn nhiu vi ngi d da ng pu esit a, Se ang g magbig mej Un ,gu itan a atna dese la ng re sto tin v tn i cc thnh ng y as so blik a tat kh ente attng mg orar iya tes para uad m Mi ido a ng an os l d asa sabe o le nde su de cnh st CPC s tip pe em p k m de ni mej ma at sa ga ay s rela up pa gu tien ph toda r r hin to na la ga si las reco bros de ido orar anD. n SP porma , cin con ila rin gpng an kik v C: com saciud nh qu la c h ng CP supu polticas que up g pa g mga tan ng la nh CP ilo unidad. La en sent pagit tal con Claudia DAl ng ulo mlisy men gb an ng C s ig ad ak an y man Ina a m usa CP up dac si seera ab ci thi an h ng SPD. an SP ayi ton th up za y el ha c xem xt un C el ione sa se ab p an D ag CPC n les legri ng est SPD an ku lm , c bna . s od an an rb h bu deb ot ng o g sobr resp ko n i tam ng g Xu g pue isy g g sien on era ilu c sa de munid e ma ng sa Kons bin desea pa ug mga m an lasy ka eto g gh : cu c ph do evaluad o ng pu nsad i qu realde laDau nayan o lun CP ang Claud izarmej an CP cn ga kin Lisa No orar gso us ad C an g mod C: buluhan CPC akaila saber sinlas an at kang ay da on nit titusyo d in ia DAlleg as tienen icasu lis gaar rela kasam ng pat g sa o lah g cng vi th ci thin m vi chnh sch g g cion ya d, sa ku cin n Ok SP na an ma ga es. an sen an mg m sa reco nh D, n, con ya win tu g a gsagawa breg mga at a g rep tido y si se M Clau piyansa ang mendacione at norm . sis at Seattle ng Se miyem upan dia i nga.pulis up Presi :ri te Lis CPC mg DA 2013 a ang dent ma rek a Da ga m llegr les deb ng anum uqd o bro a adjun h SPD c a res CPC mapataa sattle omenda ta nggpu . i ma xut sa Se , gu ng pa xuqu ug p v ta , sa era re un iye ud ashaCla las stong ang nm nte ko awaan bli sa real ia ka aard, syon sa ng atmu nanagu ya, tatasahinBilang s ang ide respsob hn v cc u xem nhng khng. DA aad tlenid ga brizar Lisa CPC 15 , u doodeya hsiy kungko m mga m o mod etcion Dau up tiwala ng pagp patak ad Claudia DAllegri Bill ica o saes. gaason phi h . Gu Hob tan ng an lle Claudia DAllegri hi gbabag pa SP rd, g sto at (transgender)a ganacsatada, shak ara gri pagitan arinig pa i no in Lis ng ng CP ulo madaxa ng SPD yahi ring ma ano maD. lak a CPC pulisya kaDa na isin ta CPC o sa up ngn sa mun tm papa Jayiden Pres mga ito in lam aan dad C: g thay ng Holli a, bulshad CPC: aa,rd, asaala ay Billug ang buon ngsw ng ta Lisa Daugaard, adka Lisa Daugaard, anm adju Ho orth mad . dara ng CPC ganda ntaanig dhibaatada ay la kulma muk ng-alan bson may ka ang ugnaya komunida kung an haa Xubnaha llegri a kin g at ku ga ku udb Jay d at ng o ang dapa g lungs lm vic thc hin nhn n nito ka buluhan ak od socda ng Ho eyaash Kate laas llin uu soo kasang Bill Jonc BillHobson Hobson gsw kuwa ku xadg uu ka socdaa Urur sa Hob xubin t dapat ailangang SP m ga 15 ort son Guddomiy Bill m ama Claudia DA y an m ag D, ers wi h a diga jiran ga taha wux g sa Ofc n upan ang m ka at up an repo e mga gawa ng miye ay Gud Bil xubin . Joseph Kess koob Ka Mga m l te ka Jay ttle Polic Ho Jay Hollingsworth a ogolaad Holl bska Jon ler dhalinta. Hal ingsworth ttle (Sea rd, Co-Chair on Jay Hollingsworth anuman rekomenda mbro ng ko ang mauna g mapataa ga residente rma. CPC waxay iyo /// kala a, waxaan n Dian Jay ka Maamulcas iyembr uuqda Duq Boliiska Sea Urur vi nhau Ho wa Lisa Daugaa syon sa s ang m ay mattalaa g mga llin eph e Narasaki, aasha xuq iyaadka ka magacaabayXubnah gs ent Sarakiisha wuxuu ka socdaa Jos a wax Kate Joncas Ke dey o dad wo tiwala ng Kate ssl doo pata unidad. Gu an kung pa pagb rth Bill Hobson u er hal Jonc da. Kate Joncas a ku jira e Managem a khs
Claudia DAllegri Lisa Daugaard, Bill Hobson Jay Hollingsworth legri Claudia DAl Kate Joncas d, Co-Chair Lisa Daugaar Joseph Kessler Bill Hobson h Diane Narasaki, wort Jay Hollings Claudia as Tina Podlodowski DAlleg Kate Jonc Lisa Da ri ugaard ler Marcel Purnell , Co-Cha Joseph Kess ir hair Bill Ho Jennifer Shaw saki, Co-C bson Nara e Jay Ho Dian wski llingsw Kevin Stuckey orth Tina Podlodo iyo er), aan as aala ka Polic abago Dia yadd wax end Presi Mag Harriett Walden l Guild) ell Kate Jon ne Ka a jinsi nsg ttle, dent noo (Sea Purn atada, sha ka madaxa Na a adjun Sea (tra te celswo Joseph Kessler rth acs sa mga ran iinttle ras Jon Seattle Mar , bulshad anta ta waxay ku cas Jose gan yah aki ana ta CPC 15 iska ysan ca CPS ph da ling a , a duw Boli abe Co Joseph Kessler shan Kes s dad Jos Hol sha had n nah mid mis Claudia eph Ke sler ito. a bul Tina Jay Jennifer Shaw Xub aan maa , buls CPC odow 15 ion Jos had Williams dha Podl iga, on). n kulm ado buls Dia ep aAaron ciati la Diane Narasaki, eyaa raadka, s h D ssler ne Na ay ma socd ski Asso muhaajiriinta Dian dumarka CPC a Ke shaq a ae kadan tad ssl rasaki, Allegri e Joncas baa Tin bulshad ayna Nar mukhaada rka Lisa Da er key Diane Narasaki, Kat a, bulshad dhi asa wax CPC ba a Po CPC inLa ugaard, Mar CP ki, soo da Co- ttle. est gud ca Dia bulshada iyo diint cel dlo soc Sea Kevin Stuc xad dam integ C ida, Purn ne la a Tina Podlodowski Uru do ska ku rada Tina Po Co-ChChair ell yahi Hind a ras ws Na bolii in uu da sler ki uu ka socdaa kuw porha Pres ian), ragg xub 15 en ada ), Kes el iden dlodows (lesb ak 15 Alca amapor magaala air xual xaaf Wald ta Ma eph ay i, Tina Podlodowski lde kale adju bros iett (bise diga Jenn jiran Jos tah y con rcel miem wux nta arka Ofcers Harr desi ka ifer CP in a ah Gud ki ban ice rma gnad dum Pu Rev. Marcel Purnell ay dab C Bil Mga Co la Ciud koo Pol dos w rne Ma aySha e os Hal lrce xub a laba ka damca por . aylaad Ho con ll attl ad. ams ogo ay kuw hair el Tina wax los a linta ), Ayun Los bs l (Se Willi Pu wax prob Co-C n Pod ulka (gay miem aan karin on dha Jen ttletam mmiss rnell ki, n lema Aaro lodo am Kevi CPC iento 15 iyo Tinbros wax Marcel Purnell Jas nifer asa Sea C a kale onsa Ma nttal a, Rev. wsk a de y que Stuc de repre Nar CP ragg aqo aan Sea i kala Jennifer Shaw rka HoJen iisk Binubuo Duq a Po enfre Sh key pade sent boos ttle e inclu ioner Bol Uru ayloo llin aw ntan nife Diane cen cad an soc ma /// dlo si aab sha la jira labo daa i gs La aque enfe r ay a Revd dive Sh yen aan gac do akii CPC an wo wsk rme a waxa llos rsida wax a. ka Ke Mar aw a ma ent Sar ws ka dade Harr pers kuw rth lodo d nag vin Alkque cel (Iminka Podan em uu 15 dad de kilas color, est iett naha onas s vin bulshada) inte relac men Jennifer Shaw Purn alde at g CPC ng 15 Stu Ke jira wux Wald grad de las Kevin Stuckey tales iona ell Tina bana Ma a. Xub cke hal en com Ma a a ku dos con /// Ka CPC o prob por com ice oo ka Stu Re iyo unid da por y e Pol kinumpirm aan rce miyem te 15 unid gaalad ld) v. ades el Alca cke lema Revd CP Kin el mie Re Ha ades com Ma l Pu Jo l Gui , wax abus . attl tnic nell o. aka mbr v. C rrie unid lde nc Marce ttle juve noo o Aaro da jinsiyad (Se Jenn rne as Ha os y inmi s l Pur n ades asy tawan ntud tt Sea yllrelig a ng Ko brong itinala miem con nbul sust sha des rrie ttle ifer , ku Willi aStuckey Wa nh ay . Un de rm ancias Kevin igna iosa Harriett Walden ttde ams Sha Sea ant c lde wax Jo n, ng ado a Wa dos s, la Ciud mg g w da gran ana ya las nse se (Actu ysa nel s Jen Rev. iisk latao nta bro lde CPS mg ga n con tes, alme ph a duw Bol abe Rev. 15 perte sha a na,ad. nif n Ofc nh lapor los nte Aa Ayu Los , Ke nah sha urba mid com la com an mi nece er p, hay dosta, ers w prob sa ron Aa Dia ntam mie yembro ho ng Lungso ng kom dahi Xub ma unid Guild Sh ss ler al Sea ron lem unid ). mbr vacan Kev pues r Sha ad sha ient Wi mu ne dha c bul aw (Gre as Se ad indg tion tos os in ttle Wil tes en attle bul llia o jiriin h ng Aaron Williams laPolic que lesb de ark ang le at kin mio Na de aan att repr m tran ena Harriett Walden d. unida dado liam ocia ms i Stuc Jennife Sea sa mg haa an la iana ( enfr de qey ese sexu pad comi ras , e de soc (Sa mu /hom Agen dum Ke ntan s deenta pagka sin)key ece sha al, los Sea ak ng eAss da kas abibilan tes osex a kom ng n vin ka ttle) inclu kaiba g la i, aqu enfe ack defensor sha / aluk sha na pami d na pang Rev dive ual/b y el ellos yen Co n lakom Stu rme da. ,n uya rsida / otro aliperte un unida -Ch a ayn ng t da com gan ng es da bul dad Harsha pers wax que 2 n,es de colo a ida dala d al/ Som de ne ch air ma diinta, bul riett lya m nh ey unid Re iin ona n,ycng Man ttle los Polic 1| . isexu d in Stucke d
vin Thnh CPC:
na isina g ap CPC: DAllegri saalang malaman ng apaganda Claudia -alang CP at kung C kung yaasha gaard dapat Lisa Dau n Guddomiye Bill Hobso Comisiona orth dos gsw C Jay Hollin llegri PC DA ia cas Claud Kate Jon ard, uga Da r Lisa sle Tch Joseph Kes ng Ch n asaki Bill Hobso Diane Nar nece ca r, gos wan rela men na iba . dere y Tin bul ng r yah ad Walden sSea at kom lodowski ch agem , s v. Aaroniyo Williams Kev quy de cion las kom g bakant ae emp tale a chos a ciati la Ha las th com gsworth dida, / ent ado . Sea resa ga dam Po iisk o com ,s, civile un rrie taong mga taong sa mga proble yo, mga ind Asso s con unid lm d unidad ang lah mga ttle prob rag rial bol th Tina Pod dlo a Hin ida unid /n Polic .) e ade vAaro ttindiv lem sa / la Rev el aha il ng d do , ade com on e Wa s tni bian), abu kom as Polic Jay Hollin i iduo ng gaalad fad g b riett Wa (Aso i, etniko ng pana ldenv ccma s ws al), unidade so Ind (lesn h juve , ldecas ial isyo nte H nel imigra ciac / de vn exu de ki cas ian ntud u sa ma may sakit sa mang hinah ibidwal y relig n) t ns fami in kale Re sust Sea n liariz c (Actu Will s xaa l Pur a do. n Tr Rev , de .Ma M de ttle). ng isy anc vi v. Aa nampala Un hiu r ados an iosa iam ah c dum ark rce Gest inm viada . Har mie ias ga g Los , s (bis urba ba s, , in Ma pang igra u pag-iisip kom ara Kate Jon an y un rce las nh lab mbr ron n hoca traba i la transg c ntes n do Th kab g o alme C lmiem taya, jan bros kom pert na, la comunid , la comunid Wi t th Pu Ofc C s thdam om nte a eners ida ay ay ene de ata en lliams Hi wax rne hay dos o may p ng M los un kuw tm la CPC d ce pkar de , an. Mula abusong pagga cinc Guil n. H ida y), ng William m thnh vi al ll Shaw r, ad . CP vaca o pues , Sea ad d Hi Kessler viven (ga d nin. distr les is (Gre ad mga ntes indg ang isa tos in ng ttle e t nife an voc lesbiana C o bia nhkale mio en n sa Se m r15 transexual, ( Polic ena de urb polic xc nh Rev.oAaron bnh ons Jen nn la mi ate n/g Bin iales on thaga de ub vi / Joseph comi esi an aqo ifer itos Age o g ay/ al Chines ,Je ng sin) CPC uo Sea nh er de ntes ng loo bis boos los defe ition 2/homose 1 | Simplied Chinese ttle) kar Sea Sh an yembro attle Police t ng droga, at mi exu xual de Mana al/ chu, v rag a cad t th Thnh Ph Seattle v bawax ttle. apata y aw 5 CPC ba si g la n el i rasaki, /bise nso jira labo cke 1 | Trad Polic m ng y otro CP , Alk aa res vi ph gem aan xual Stu com Ofcer ng v a pert at , de C i / ald in / nh . a) Ke le unid ka sib ene mu a u Man los en ng kuw H had Kev Diane Na Tch att vin ad empresa c ce a la e dere / il, t Associ (Imin ng m aan buls s la age nagta tra c th 15 miye atttle an cho men St g Sea kinum s civile t . Asso ation an sa Seattle PoGuild rial e indiv.) , uc nhim v h Kinakata a dng u vc ba ke c c nh St Se St Seattle. C Re s, la Polic Polic ciat oo ka ban t ho kh m y C pir ng ion v. e ch bro m an iduo ng Ch (Aso m Ha g ng lice n g ial isa s a ng ciac tn familiarizado mga mi itinala lim derrie c nh o ng Kons den in wa cng Sea an tt ki Hardi ch Wal den g pre ttle) Wa ng m Ges yembro . Nakatira o sin riettn . s ga tao Los c ti tt Re tin n L C ng ng lde ga ng mga m i t cc . CPeh mie vi dlodows trab c Qu to n , o mbr Po o, ajan ng v. ng ng lm a ng os sa g gi Aa en CP pu iye de Tin , los Seatt ron la CPC C sa lah s mbro C cinc m ngsod. nhn komun lisya sa Se g hoc sa ula o distr Wi m iam vive Lu le at mese Purnell Aaro n Will g tc v tn x da th llia n an at itos o attle. ms ida g pa u sn sc (Sa kas 5 mga kin Marcel iales ng 1 | Vietna n ab gk de kopolic attle. kom ibi alukuy ng na pam d na pang-n ng mun lan ngi b aiba ng ttle. un Shaw , c ak an, ma ga h st Se idad at Sea dalawan ida da n ng ng ilyar sa nam/l eg cn d h y . os Jennifer na tn m ng ko g m ko bakan ng ga ga tao iba mga pro yo, mga munida , c m|un ckey 1 te Span idaish sa kom ind ng nhp c ng tnh n/ i vn ng dn d ng pa ang lahi, etn taongisy Kevin Stu n Indian, d ng imigran isyon) u sa m may sakit sa blemang hinah ibidwal ikong nana ng lde apang-a pag-iisi ara cng nhng ng transge ang komunida te, ang kom mpalataya, i, rriett Wa ka Ha ba gi v. bu n taa Re y un song pa p o may p ng nder, ad d ms n. mga an tnh/chu ggamit vocate ng lesbian/g idad ng urban 1 ron Willia g isang Mula sa Se | Ko Rev. Aa
trng hai ch (Hin c ng) trong hi
CPC
ng
sto rin
ano m
at
ay/bi ng karap atang sib sexual/ il, ang
Manag miyembro attle Police Of ng droga, at em nagtatra ent Associaat mula sa Se cers Guild att tio ba ng liman ho ang mga n ang isa. Na le Police m g presin ka to ng pu iyembro ng CP tira o lisya sa C Seattle. sa lahat
rean
1 | Tag
alog
47
APPENDIX C
A PowerPoint was used at community briengs and workshops.
ng e i r B y t i n anization Commu Date Org

PARTNERS IN REFORM
We need your to create help a stronger, safer and more connected community.
CREATING CHANGE: The role of community

CREATING CHANGE: Policy areas to comment on now
CREATING CHANGE: Bias-Free Policing Recommendations

Institutional/Intentional
Policies which explicitly discriminate against Policies that a group or groups. negatively impact one or more groups unintentionally. Example:
Historically, police departments refused to hire people of color.
Successful police reform depends on widespread community input. Ongoing community engagement is of paramount importance. Community input and dialogue over time will also promote condence in SPD, strengthen community-police relations, and support the Police Department in ensuring public safety for all.
Institutional/Unintentional Individual/Intentional Individual/unintentional

Prejudice in action discrimination. Unconscious a*tudes and beliefs.

Example: Example: Heavy penalties for Police ocer calling driving with a suspended someone an ethnic slur license. while arresting them.
Example: Police ocer calling for back-up more o:en when stopping a person of color.
CREATING CHANGE: Bias-free policing recommendations
Institutional

Ins>tu>onal bias may be inten>onal or uninten>onal, and in either case changing policy, ins>tu>onal culture and measuring outcomes are essen>al. CPCs proposed policy: Eliminates policies and prac>ces that have an unjus%ed nega>ve impact on some groups of people. Focuses on broad ins>tu>onal prac>ces and the consequences of those prac>ces, not the behavior of individual ocers. Requires SPD to explore equally eec>ve alterna>ve prac>ces that would result in less nega>ve impact. Requires data collec>on and annual repor>ng of nega>ve impact in resource deployment and other prac>ces.
NEXT STEPS Who makes decisions and when are they made?

CREATING CHANGE: Bias-free policing recommendations
Individual
Individual bias may be intentional or unintentional, in either case changing behavior and changing attitudes is essential. Under CPCs proposed policy: Ocers shall not make decisions or take actions that are inuenced in any way by bias, prejudice, or discriminatory intent. Bias cannot be expressed verbally, by gesture or in writing. Ocers are required to take into consideration relevant characteristics in determining appropriate services or police procedures designed for such individuals. Ocers and supervisors are subject to discipline for engaging in, ignoring or condoning bias. The Chief reinforces policy in periodic updates and annual training.
48
APPENDIX C
Policy Overviews were provided for community briengs and workshops.
Community Police Commission CPC Bias-Free Policing Policy Recommendations

October 2013
The need for change Some people, particularly people of color, are disproportionately affected by law enforcement. Issues of unequal treatment involving stops, arrests and use of force are especially troubling. In some cases, this may be the result of intentional bias, but it also can be the result of unintentional bias in systems and institutions. Both types of bias may cause police to treat people differently, which may be counterproductive and unfair. What the data show The 2011 SPD Community Survey reported that 63% of Seattle respondents believed racial profiling was a problem for the Department. Bias-free policing recommendations The policy recommendations seek to address both individual and institutional bias in SPD (when officers are unfair in their treatment of a person and when SPD practices negatively impact a group or groups of people). The changes are intended to lessen the number of incidents involving both types of bias. Both approaches will better ensure equity in police services, increase SPD effectiveness, and build mutual respect and trust between SPD and our diverse communities. Types of bias

Community Police Commission CPC Stops and Detentions Policy Recommendations
Institutional/Intentional Policies which explicitly discriminate against a group or groups Historically, police departments refused to hire people of color Institutional/Intentional Policies that negatively impact one or more groups unintentionally Heavy penalties for driving with a suspended license Individual/Intentional Prejudice in action - discrimination Police officer calling someone an ethnic slur while arresting them Individual/Unintentional Unconscious attitudes and beliefs Police officer calling for back-up more often when stopping a person of color
October 2013 The need for change One of the most important freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution is the ability to move freely and to not be subjected to unwarranted searches and seizures. In order to ensure that there is strong support and confidence by the public in their police officers, it is critical that officers do their work without bias and within the parameters of the Constitution. What the data show The DOJ investigation concluded that SPD policies and training failed to clearly explain when an officer may legally stop, detain or search people short of arrest. DOJ found that these policies created the risk that SPD officers would make illegal stops and searches. The 2011 SPD Community Survey reported that 46% of Seattle respondents believed that there is a problem with the SPD stopping people without good reason. Stops and detentions policy recommendations Explains the different stops officers may make and how voluntary and non-voluntary stops differ. Describes what officers may and may not do during non-voluntary stops. Explains that officers must identify themselves and tell the person why they are being detained if its a non- voluntary stop. Officers may hold individuals for only as long as necessary. Explains when an officer may frisk or pat-down a detained person for weapons. Requires officers to report all non-voluntary stops for review and to detect patterns of discrimination. What do you think? 1. Does the proposed policy make it clear when an officer can legally stop and question you? 2. Does the proposed policy (and chart) help you to know when you can legally walk away from an officer and when you are legally required to stay and talk to the officer? What would help you understand your rights? 3. Is it clear from the policy when an officer may search a person? 4. Do you think the proposed policy will help officers better know their obligations when stopping someone?
Recommendations related to individual bias Individual bias may be intentional or unintentional, in either case changing behavior and changing attitudes is essential. Under CPCs proposed policy: Officers shall not make decisions or take actions that are influenced in any way by bias, prejudice, or discriminatory intent. Bias cannot be expressed verbally, by gesture or in writing. 1
Community Police Commission SPD Proposed Use of Force Policy

October 2013
Community Police Commission CPC In-Car Video Recordings Policy Recommendations

October 2013
The CPC has not made any use of force policy recommendations because SPD's proposed policy was only made available to the CPC very recently and it has not had sufficient time to make any recommendations. The CPC has reviewed the proposed policy and key elements of it are highlighted below. Community input is sought on SPD's proposed policy. The need for change A pattern of using unnecessary or excessive force was a key finding of DOJs investigation of SPD. What the data show DOJ found reason to believe that excessive force was disproportionately an issue in cases involving people of color, and that force too often was used when it was not warranted or to an unwarranted degree. DOJ also found reason to be concerned about force used against people with mental illness or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The 2011 SPD Community Survey reported that 72% of Seattle respondents believed there was a problem with SPD using excessive force. Use of Force policy changes proposed by SPD Explains when force may be necessary and reasonable, and emphasizes using skills to reduce conflict (de- escalation skills) if possible, to avoid the use of force. Identifies four levels of force and provides that all cases involving forcewith the exception of those involving minimal forcemust be reported and either reviewed by a supervisor or subject to a formal investigation. Details when officers may use weapons. Weapons must be authorized and officers must be trained and approved to use them. Explains when supervisors can or must refer use of force complaints or investigations to the Office of Professional Accountability (the office responsible for reviewing incidents of possible officer misconduct). What do you think? 1. What issues regarding use of force do you think are most important to be addressed in a new SPD use of force policy? 2. What problems has your community had (if any) with SPDs use of force?
The need for change In-car video (ICV) recordings have not always been reliably available to confirm or contradict written police reports or witness observations of controversial incidents. They have also has not always been reliably available due to a combination of department policies and technological limitations and challenges. What the data show ICV recordings of officers interacting with members of the public have not always been available, or of usable quality. Several technology constraints have also been a factor limiting recordings. Policy and training related to ICV has not always been clear. In-car video recording policy recommendations The recommended changes are intended to ensure SPD has appropriate recording technology, and that its policies and training ensure consistent usage of recordings. The availability of recordings for review will enhance public safety and officer accountability. In developing its technology recommendations, the CPC balanced the need for video recordings to be available for evidence with the need to protect officer and public privacy. The CPC also balanced the need for data with the costs of obtaining it and ensuring it can be easily accessed. The CPC recommends changes consistent with the new in-car video capabilities SPD will have in place October 1, 2013: Always on activation of the ICV system at ignition. Video recording triggered by patrol car lights, audio, in crash situations, and at certain speed thresholds. The CPC did not support additional video triggering at ignition, by door, siren or rifle lock release, or via GPS (location). One reason is that too much un-useful data would be captured at significant expense, and it would be difficult to locate and focus on only relevant recordings. Some triggers are also redundant (for example, sirens are rarely if ever used without lights, so all videos triggered by lights will cover any situations involving sirens). Other policy and related recommendations include: The audio system must be on whenever the in-car video is on, with few exceptions. If an event that should have been recorded is not recorded, the officer must explain in the incident report why it was not recorded. SPD needs to appoint a single command level leader responsible for oversight of ICV. SPD needs a written plan that explains how the Department will monitor proper use of ICV and ensure supervisory oversight. SPD needs a documented training plan that explains how and when all officers will be trained on the new system, along with refresher courses over time. 1 | P a g e
49
APPENDIX C
1. . . 1. : -1 . 1. 1. 1. 2.

The surveys were in nine different languages.
2. -2 .
2.
2. 2. 1
- - - 1 Arabic 1
1 11
Amharic
, . . Waad ku mahadsan tahay waqtiga aad gelisay dhamaystirka su'aalahaan ku saabsan Waaxda Boliiska Seattle iyo 1. . siyaabaha lagu kaalmeeyn karo boliiska si ay si wanaagsan ugu adeegaan bulshadena. Jawaabaha aad bixisid
Su'aalaadka Guddiga Boliiska Bulshada

waxay ahaan doonaan kuwo aad loo asturo.

1. Marka. kowaad, fadlan aad tahayde ama haddii aad qilaafsan tahay wararka tilmaan haddii waafaqsan completar Gracias por tomarse el tiempo este cuestionario acerca delsoo Departamento Polica de Seattle y las Questionnaire ng Community Police de Commission socda. formas para ayudar a que la polica sirva mejor a nuestra comunidad. Sus respuestas se mantendrn con estricta
.

Cuestionario de la Comisin Policial de la comunidad

Salamat sa paglalaan ng oras upang sagutan ang questionnaire na ito tungkol sa Seattle Police Department at mga paraan upang matulungan ang pulisyaAad u na mas mahusay na paglingkuran ang ating komunidad. Ituturing ang iyong mga sagot bilang confidencialidad. Si Xooggan Xoogaa Xoogaa Ma . ganap na kumpidensyal. Waafaqsan Waafaqsan qilaafsan qilaafsan Ogsooni 1. Primero, indique si est de acuerdo con las . Boliiska Seattle waxay dhamaan isirada iyo jinsiyadaha ula dhaqmaan o en desacuerdo siguientes afirmaciones. 1. Una, pakisaad kung ikaw ay sang-ayon o hindi sang-ayon sa mga sumusunod na pahayag. Cm n qu v dnh thi gian hon tt bng cu hi ny v S Cnh St Seattle v v nhng cch thc gip cnh st sinaan. Un poco Un poco en Totalmente No cng ph c v c ng ng c a chng ta ngy tt p h Boliiska Seatte waxay sameyaan shaqo wanaagsan xagga xajinta n. Cu tr li ca qu v s c bo mt nghim ngt nht. Totalmente de acuerdo de acuerdo desacuerdo en Lubos na sabe Medyo 2. . Medyo Hindi Lubos na Hindi ammaanka. Sang-ayon Sang-ayon Sang-ayon Hindi Sang- Alam desacuerdo ayon Boliiska Seattle waxay dhamaan xaafadaha Seattle ugu adeegaan cho qu 1. Trc tin, vui lng bit v ng hay khng ng vi nhng cu trnh by sau y. La Polica de Seattle trata igual a las personas de todas las razas y Pantay-pantay na pinakikitunguhan ng Seattle Police ang mga tao ng lahat ng siman.

Bng Cu Hi Dnh Cho Hi ng Cnh St Cng ng
personas mga tao jeer aad ku fakartay in Boliiska kasta, fadlan inta Seattle ku kacaan waxyaabaha soo socda. La Polica de Seattle sirve de igual forma a todas las reas de Pantay-pantay na pinaglilingkuran ng Seattle Police ang lahat ng lugar ng . Seattle Inta Xoogaa Ma Ku Ma C nh St Seattle i x cng b ng v i m i ng i thu c m i Seattle Badanaa Badna dhawaad Ogsooni Badan La Polica de Seattle hace un buen trabajo al servir a su barrio . chng tc v sc tc Marna Mahusay ang ginagawang trabaho ng Seattle Police na pinaglilingkuran ang . Cnh St Seattle lm tt cng vic gi an ton cho mi ngi Waxay ku kacaan soocidda isirka (racial profiling) qu los oficiales iyong kapitbahayan 2. En cada elemento, indique con frecuencia considera que de la Polica de Seattle hacen lo Cnh St Seattle phc v cng bng tt c mi khu vc Seattle . Waxay dadka ula dhaqmaan si kala duwan taasoo ugu wacan isirkooda siguiente. Cnh St Seattle lm tt cng vic phc v khu vc ca qu v . Waxay dadka ula dhaqmaan si kala duwan taasoo ugu wacan nooca
. 2. . Qodob

Boliiska Seattle waxay sameyaan shaqo wanaagsan xagga adeegga ay u lahi at etnisidad La Polica de Seattle hace un buen trabajo al proteger a las Mahusay ang ginagawang trabaho ng Seattle Police na pinapanatiling ligtas ang qabtaan xaafadaha tilmaan
orgenes tnicos
Hon
Ton ng
Kh ng
Hi Khng ng
Hon Ton Khng ng
Khng Bit
2. Para sa bawat item, pakisaad kung gaano kadalas sa tingin mo ginagawa ng mga opisyal ng Seattle Police ang mga Muy Un poco No muy Casi No bagay na ito. frecuente frecuentem frecuentem nunca 2. i v i tng hng mc, vui sabe lng cho bit qu v cho rng nhn vin Cnh St Seattle c thng xuyn lm nhng Waxay joojiyaan dadka saaraan baabuurta iyaga oo aan haysanin sabab mente ente ente vic ny khng. wanaagsan Napakadala Medyo Hindi Halos Hindi Realiza perfilamiento racial s Madalas Gaanong Hindi Alam . Waxay joojiyaan dadka ku sugan waddada ama meelaha dadweynaha Madalas Trata a las personas en forma diferente por su raza isugu yimaada iyaga oo aan haysanin sabab wanaagsan Kh Khng Gn nh Khng Nagsasagawa ng racial profiling (pagkilos batay sa lahi) . Rt Trata a las personas en forma diferente por su gnero o thng thng thng khng bao Bit Waxay adeegsadaan xoog xad dhaaf ah Iba ang pakikitungo sa mga tao dahil sa kanilang lahi xuyn xuyn xuyn gi identidad de gnero Waxay adeegsadaan af lagaado Iba ang pakikitungo sa mga tao dahil sa kanilang kasarian o piniling kasarian Detiene a las personas en los automviles sin un buen motivo Tham gia thnh kin sc t c 3. , . Waxay dadka laga tirada badan yahay u adeegsadaan af xumo qofka uu yahay ama aqoonsigooda lab ama dhedig .
.

Waxay dadka laga tirada badan yahy u adeegsadaan af xumo ku jirto buen motivo takoor Usa excesiva fuerza fsica Waxay sabab la'aan kadeedaan dadka
i x vi mi ngi khc nhau theo chng tc ca h Detiene a las personas en la calle o en lugares pblicos sin un Pinapahinto ang mga taong nakasakay sa mga kotse nang walang makatwirang i x vi mi ngi khc nhau theo gii tnh hoc nhn bit

gii tnh ca h Ngng xe Pinapahinto ang mga tao sa kalsada o sa mga pampublikong lugar nang walang khng c l do chnh ng ca mi ngi m makatwirang dahilan Usa lenguaje oral abusivo Waxay dadka ula dhaqmaan si xushmad leh Ngng m i ngi trn ng hoc t i nhng khu vc cng cng Gumagamit ng labis na pisikal na puwersa Usa insultos raciales contra las minoras Waxay dhaqso u xalliyaan dambiyada, waxayna soo xeraan m khng c l do chnh ng Gumagamit ng mapang-abusong pananalita Usa insultos homofbicos contra las minoras Dng v lc qu m c dambiileyaasha 1 Acosa a las personas sin un buen motivo S dng ngn t s nh c Gumagamit ng mga nakakapanakit na tawag batay sa lahi sa mga minority Trata a las personas en forma respetuosa S dng ngn ng c tnh cch k th Gumagamit ng mga nakakapanakit na tawag batay sa kasarian sa mga minority chng tc i vi cc dn Resuelve crmenes y arresta criminales rpidamente tc thiu s 1 Nanggigipit ng mga tao nang walang makatwirang dahilan S dng ngn ng c tnh cch k th ng tnh i vi cc dn 1 Magalang na pinakikitunguhan ang mga tao tc thiu s Mabilis na nilulutas ang mga krimen at hinuhuli ang mga kriminal v l do g Quy ri mi ngi khng i x tn trng vi mi ngi Gii quyt nhanh chng cc trng hp vi phm v bt gi ti 1 phm
dahilan
50
Appendix D: Survey Tool
51
APPENDIX D
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire about the Seattle Police Department and ways to help the police better serve our community. Your answers will be held in strictest confidence. 1. First, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree Dont Know
Community Police Commission Questionnaire
The Seattle Police treat people of all races and ethnicities equally The Seattle Police do a good job keeping people safe The Seattle Police serve all areas of Seattle equally The Seattle Police do a good job serving your neighborhood
2. For each item, please indicate how often you think Seattle Police officers do these things.
Very Often Somewhat Often Not That Often Almost Never Don't Know
Engage in racial profiling Treat people differently because of their race Treat people differently because of their gender or gender identity Stop people in cars without good reason Stop people on the street or in public places without good reason Use excessive physical force Use verbally abusive language Use racial slurs towards minorities Use homophobic slurs towards minorities Harass people for no good reason Treat people respectfully Quickly solve crimes and arrest criminals 1
52
APPENDIX D
3. For each group, please indicate if you think the Seattle police treats them the same as other members of the community or not as well as other members of the community.

Same Not As Well Dont Know
African Americans Latinos or Hispanics Native Americans Asian and Pacific Islanders People who are Islamic or of Middle Eastern descent Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender people Young people People who are homeless People with mental illness or problems with alcohol or drugs People with a criminal record
4. The Community Police Commission, the Seattle Police Department, and the U.S. Department of Justice are considering a number of ideas about ways to improve the Seattle Police Departments performance. Please indicate whether you think the following ideas would make a difference in improving the performance of the Seattle Police Department.
Will Make A Difference May Make A Difference Wont Make A Difference Dont Know
Make cameras in police vehicles automatically record more often. Make racial bias/racial equity training of police officers mandatory. Ensure that the Police Department documents and addresses the bias of individual officers. Ensure that the Police Department reports data by race and national origin and progress in reducing bias. Ensure that officers are clear on when they are allowed to stop or detain someone, and how they are to conduct themselves during stops. Ensure that community members are clear on when officers are allowed to stop or detain them, and know their rights and obligations. Train officers to use conflict reduction with the goal of reducing the use of force. Require officers to report use of force, and review and investigate these cases in more instances. Educate the public about how to make a complaint about the Seattle Police Department
53
APPENDIX D
5. Have you ever made a complaint to the Seattle Police Department? Yes IF YES: Would you say you are satisfied or dissatisfied with how the department handled your complaint? Very satisfied Somewhat satisfied Somewhat dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Don't know No Don't know 6. Have you or a member of your family had a personal experience with Seattle police? If so, was it positive or negative? Yes IF YES: How positive or negative was it? Positive Somewhat positive Somewhat negative Negative No (skip to Q8) Don't know (skip to Q8) 7. Please share some details about the experience with the Seattle police. 8.
54 Seattle Community Police Commission
Is there anything else you want to share?
APPENDIX D
Finally, tell us a little bit about yourself. Again, your responses to this questionnaire will be kept in strict confidence. 9. Please select your race: (choose just ONE) African American Latino or Hispanic Asian American Native American Pacific Islander White Other or Multi-racial (please specify) ___________________ 10. What is your ethnicity? __________________________ 11. Are you an immigrant or refugee? Yes No

12. If your family speaks a language other than English at home, please tell us what language you speak:
_________________________ 13. What is your gender? Male Female Transgender Transgender (Male to Female) Transgender (Female to Male) Other (please specify) ____________________ 14. Do you identify as: Heterosexual Gay Lesbian Bisexual 15. What is your age? 17 years old or younger 18 25 years old 26 35 years old 36 55 years old 56 years old or older 4
55
APPENDIX D
16. What part of Seattle do you spend the most time in? Central District Downtown International District North Seattle (other than University District) Pioneer Square South Seattle West Seattle University District Other: (please specify) ___________________ 17. How did you receive or hear about this questionnaire? Community organization: (please specify) __________________ CPC website Social media News Other: (please specify) _____________
Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with us! If you have any questions, please contact ocpc@seattle.gov or 206-233-2664.
56
Appendix E: Languages Spoken in Homes of Survey Respondents
57
APPENDIX E
Survey respondents were asked if their family spoke a language other than English at home. This is a self-reported list of the languages cited by respondents.
Amharic Apache/Navaho Arabic Bantu Barawaani Bisaya, Bicola Blackfoot Brillo Cambodian Cambodian /Laos Cambodian/Vietnamese Cantonese Cherokee, Lakota Cheyanne Chinese Comanche Dutch Elocano Filipino Eskimo Espanol (Spanish) Farsi Filipino French Gaelic Gambian Garifuna Gavifuna German Ghatree Greek Haida Hamaric Harda Hebrew Hindi Hmong IABO Ilokano Indian Italian Iushootseed Japanese Khmer Kiro Kiswahi, Somali Korean Lakota Sioux
Lao/Thai
Nez Perce Northern Cheyenne Oromia Oromiffa Oromo Papago Polish Quahada-comanche Quiehe Russian Samoan Saninke Sicilian Sign language smalgyak (An American Indian language) Somali Swahili Swedish Tagalog, Phillipine dialect Taishanese Teyresa ?, Oromesa ?, Amharic Thai/Laos Tieng Viet Tigrana Tigrigna Tlingit Tsalagi/american Ukranian URDU
Laotian Makah Malay Mandarin/Cantonese Mienh Mixteca Mongolian Nahuatl Navajo Nepali
58
Appendix F: Key Themes Matrix
59
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesBias-Free Policing

What needs to change?
Many believe SPD ofcers do not treat all people equally Many report police bias against members of their communitiesbias based on race, ethnicity, gender or gender identity, age (youth), and perceived economic or housing (low-income or homeless) status, as well as bias against those who are chemically dependent or mentally ill; some non-English speaking communities report bias Police bias is demonstrated in many ways Lack of understanding and tolerance of other cultures and customs (including youth culture) and unfair judgments about those cultures Bias is also demonstrated by bullying or intimidation, anger, use of racial, homophobic and other slurs, disrespect, rudeness, meanness and insensitivity, generally and towards specic groups Proling is an issuethere is a belief that individuals are targeted because of their status Language barriers cause police to believe nonEnglish speaking people are uncooperative which causes friction and miscommunication; even accents result in biased treatment, with ofcers making unfair assumptions People who are homeless are treated like second class citizens; because of their visibility, police routinely run known street youth through the system and arrest them People who are non-gender conforming are targeted unfairly Some believe ofcers stop them and make unfair accusations, such as doing drugs, using alcohol or belonging to gangs based on their status or how they look or dress Ofcers are sometimes unfair or unresponsive in how they deal with certain crime victims (owners of businesses ling crime reports who are members of minority groups, sex workers who report assaults, DV victims in LGBT relationships, assault victims who are addicts, the homeless whose belongings are stolen, supported housing residents, those with criminal records) There is little police protection in low-income neighborhoods and some of the issue is cultural, i.e. not willing to call 9-1-1 which is, nevertheless, the basis for SPD deployment decisions; some fear calling police because of their undocumented status People are not taken seriously by police because of race, economic status or zip code Some stated that bias is associated with individual ofcers, not with SPD as a whole
Feedback on draft policy recommendations

Some asked how the policy would be implemented and enforced, specically how bias complaints will be documented. If an ofcer doesnt offer to call a supervisor but claims to have done so, how will that tracked? Also, how is bias dened and how will it be proven?
New ideas and proposed solutions

Many suggest hiring more ofcers from diverse backgrounds and some who are bilingual to better reect and understand the people they serve (people of color, people from immigrant and refugee communities, and Native Americans); this can also help resolve difculties in communications involving stops of those who are not English procient
Some concern expressed about whether calling a supervisor will make a differencehow will supervisors be held We need to encourage young people from these communities accountable? There are already policies that are not followed, to consider policing as a profession so how will any new policies help? Establish cultural competency/racial equity trainings for Concerning the question of notifying a supervisor of a bias ofcers and mandate cultural competency; but in addition, complaint: increase diversity of skill sets and perspectives of those within SPD in order to change its culture There was limited feedback on whether an ofcer should be required or offer to call a supervisorit may not be reassuring to the subject for another police ofcer to respond to a complaint and it could create more of a problem; others thought a subject should have the right to call the supervisor directly without ofcer involvement; questions were raised as to whether a subject would be required to wait for a supervisor to come, with some wanting the option for those claiming bias to opt out and say no to calling or waiting for a supervisor Support was expressed for resolving bias at a system level (e.g. police emphasis on street crimes rather than on white collar crimes; also tracking and responding to the problem of disproportionate stops, and resolving issues such as deploying resources based on 9-1-1 calls) Questions were raised about how bias will be trackedsome interest in whether there will be an independent entity, outside of SPD, responsible for maintaining bias data Some feel it may not be possible to achieve bias-free policing, therefore it is important for ofcers to be trained to manage their bias, to understand power differentials between the police and groups (such as people who are homeless), and on how to accept differences between people and cultures Ensure bias training covers not only race, but other important issues (gender norms/queerness, age, disability and poverty); training to deal with those in crisis should not be optional Some suggest community involvement (possibly paid) in designing and leading these trainings; others suggest providing mentors to lead training and keep younger ofcers accountable Create a mechanism in the police communication systems that identies allegations of bias and triggers reports to supervisors Require ofcers to use part of their shift to conduct community service within communities of color that are different from their ethnic background; also have police better connected to service providers so they dont just arrest but rather offer resources to those in need. If policy is implemented, an education component is needed so people will know they have the right to le a bias complaint and how the report and investigation process works Employ community liaison ofcers to interact with the community and provide guidance to ofcers Biasfree policing requires biasfree communitiesraise public consciousness about racial prejudice and inequity Measure results through satisfaction surveys and track response by demographic categories Create a zero tolerance policy for bias Establish nancial (loss of paycheck) penalties for severe bias Community members also need to work harder to ensure kids are respectfulaccountability goes both ways
60
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesStops and Detentions

Many community members dont know their rights in regard to stops and detentions or whether there is a complaint or appeal system Many believe some people are stopped unfairly (for no reason or due to racial proling, prejudice and ignorance of customs) There is a belief that there are too many stops that are the result of unfair racial proling and ofcers assuming guilt without justication, including presuming guilt of those with criminal records Young people report ofcers stop them for no reason or make up reasons to justify the contact (i.e. contact for smoking at a bus stop, pulling them over for a tail light being out, etc.) Others, specically homeless, non-English speaking adults and people of color, shared concerns about ofcers who make stops, request I.D. and unlawfully search (or even seize possessions) without providing reason Some report long detentions and eventual release without explanation or apology Latinos and African Americans report being proled as gang members Latinos report being proled or stopped based on dress or the model or year of their vehicles and being worried about going out at night for fear of being stopped by police; some indicate that police intimidate them with threats of contacting immigration authorities Stops are difcult for non-English speaking persons, including those who identify as immigrants/refugees, since interpretation services are not available It is thought that police dont seem to understand the rules for legitimate stops and detentions since some ofcers cross the line by presuming guilt and making stops without sufcient cause In the experience of some, ofcers become hostile or do not listen when an individual asserts their rights by asking questions about why they were stopped

Many people were positive about the intent of the policy recommendationsto make clear when ofcers may or may not stop, detain and search people and the rights and obligations of each party (ofcer and subject) However, the policy could be improved

There is strong support for educating both the police and public about their rights and obligations in the area of stops and detentions
While there is agreement that people should know their rights, there is concern that if they assert their rights (i.e. show an ACLU card), the situation can escalate, so policy The language remains too vague - need to communicate and training should provide guidance to police in responding more clearly what is legal and not legal to the assertion of rights The denitions for the types of stops are not clear, so it People have the right to know the difference between remains unclear when an ofcer may stop and question voluntary and nonvoluntary stops. Include an educational someone tool, a rule book as part of the policy, so people know In the different types of stops, it isnt clear what the what to do and who call when improperly stopped. Partner ofcer may or may not require from the individual with diverse/minority community leaders to educate the (identication, etc.) community and assist those in non-English speaking Examples might be helpful to make the distinctions communities to become educated about their rights more clear Provide a card for non-English speaking residents that states How does the policy resolve the problem of police they do not speak English and lists their primary language, making stops or searching without reasonable cause, and/or allow them to ask for a interpreter if stopped or i.e. assuming people are guilty or assuming people arrested have a weapon without sufcient evidence or facts to There was signicant support for ofcer training including: support the stop? Making sure ofcers have clear guidance on what is What is reasonable causedoes it ensure there police legal and not legal have substantial evidence that justies a stop? Using consistent language that is understandable Explain how SPD will respond to complaints to the public An SPD representative noted that the language an ofcer may Using community organizations to help educate ofcers NOT (shown in the stops and detentions chart) doesnt allow Assuring police know how to deal with people for exibility necessary in unpredictable and rapidly evolving with mental illness issues since they often cannot circumstances; the language should be changed to unlikely communicate effectively to will likely not Assuring police always rst apply de escalation skills The policy should state that ofcers must identify themselves in stops situations and explain specically why they are stopping someone Police should be required to explain what peoples rights are when they are stopped or arrested Communicate back to the public about how trainings are going and what ofcers are learning Document and track all types of stops and detentions and report demographics of those stopped and arrested in order to identify groups that may have been stopped disproportionately (i.e. adults and youth who are homeless, the mentally ill, drug users, people of color, immigrants, those who are gender non-conforming, etc.); this might provide more transparency about possible quotas SPD needs to hold ofcers accountable, so there needs to be ways to identify ofcers who do not follow the policy (i.e. identify patterns of inappropriate stopping associated with individual ofcers Community outreach or mental health/social workers partnering with police on the beat could reduce incidents of inappropriate stops and help police be more effective
61
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesUse of Force

There is signicant concern that police too often resort to use of force when it is not necessary This is an issue in specic areas of the city (Rainier Beach and the Central District) A fair number of African American individuals either had rst-hand knowledge or knew someone who had experienced excessive use of force Street youth and the homeless community think there are too many incidents of excessive force in interactions with these individuals (physical force, drawn weapons, use of mace/tasers, etc.) There is deep pain and concern about excessive use of force against members of the Native/Urban Indian community Some community members report not feeling safe when stopped by police (reports that some ofcers point guns at people as a means of intimidation or force entry into homes without a court order) Some report ofcers using bullying tactics, going on power trips, and using verbally abusive and offensive language; taunting by ofcers escalates situations Minimal use of force contact is the most frequent type of force contact for youth but it has important negative ramications on their attitudes Many young adults felt that police do not show remorse for abuse or take responsibility for mistakes

Many commented that it was difcult to provide feedback on the SPD draft policy its very long and confusing; the policy and use of force denitions newed to be simplied and made more clear UOF /de-escalation policies should be dened for situations involving civil disobedience, including stable/peaceful civil disobedience Questions were raised about how does the proposed policy compares to the current policy There is interest in learning more specics concerning: Minimal force Necessary and reasonable Four levels of force Use of weapons and denition of weapons Zone of privacy The types of force chart needs to be rened (but specics of what is needed were not provided) Use of force should always be a last resort; some expressed concern that in using rearms, police are taught shoot to kill Force should be commensurate, i.e. if subject does not have lethal weapon or situation is non-lethal, police should use martial arts rather than lethal weapons Once a person is handcuffed, force should be minimal Support for accountability for ofcers who use excessive force; there was some support for reporting and investigating all types of force, including minimal use of force Support for training on use of force and de-escalation tactics Many youth and young adults felt policy changes would not stop excessive force, but heavier punishments might make a difference There was a suggestion that pointing a gun should not be classied as a Type I use of force; it should be classied as a more serious use of force since it is tied to potential intent to shoot Use of stop sticks against motorcycles may be extremethe policy should reect the extreme nature of this use of force. The policy should support a persons zone of privacy (ofcers shouldnt touch individuals unless they put their hands on an ofcer, reach for their gun, or run) Provide an interpreter before force is used when dealing with non-English speaking individuals Ofcers should not use rearms to confront individuals who are homeless or who have drug or alcohol issues
New ideas and proposed solutions Consider new and additional training, and schedule periodic and regular re-training:
Incorporate information regarding cultural perspectives into training for crowd control; make sure ofcers are trained to have de-escalation attitude going into civil disobedience situations Help ofcers be better prepared to deal with all citizens, including people with mental illness or substance abuse issues Provide more ongoing training on use of force and ways to de-escalate situations (including re-instituting verbal judo); demonstrating respect is an important aspect of de-escalation
Demonstrate care in hiring and provide ongoing support

Overrepresentation of males and veterans in SPD; develop alternative recruitment strategies to hire more women, people of color and LGBTQ individuals Evaluate personality and coping skills as part of the hiring process Require counseling of ofcers who have had complaints led against them for use of force, and have those who have had mood or behavior changes evaluated Change fraternity/macho culture; encourage ofcers to discuss their trauma and mental health issues Ofcers react defensively without support, so ensure they are teamed up in pairs Concern that fear is an underlying mentalityofcers are afraidthey resort too often to a stance of protecting themselves; they need training to counter this base mentality
Educate the community

Distribute handout with phone number and website so people can report abuses; all abuses need to be reported so SPD and others have accurate record of how often excessive or inappropriate use of force occurs Conduct workshops dedicated to use of force; provide information about what type of force is applicable to certain situations, what triggers use of force and governing policies and protocols, laws constraining use of force, show impact of policy and data on use of force incidents - Use community leaders to bridge cultural gap - Possibly pay organizational staff person for ongoing liaison function Consider using alternative community resources as a way to resolve disputes, instead of relying on police Repeal State law that allows ofcers to claim a justied homicide defense Establish a community review board to provide accountability The community should have an opportunity to give feedback on the effectiveness of training (i.e. de-escalation trainings)
62
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesIn-Car Video Recordings

There is skepticism about how the police use in-car video recordings Some believe ofcers move interactions outside the view of the camera and there is concern about blind spots and cameras not being 360

Most feel these recommendations are very specic and clear and that there is value in having more consistent, reliable recordings which will either reduce abusive behavior or be useful to police in documenting appropriate behavior; ICV protects public and ofcers; ofcers should not have anything to hide, and should record as often as possible

Individuals should have the right to document themselves with any devices and police ofcers must tell them they have this right Be sure that there is a continuous equipment maintenance regimen so there are no failures in video recordings Incident reports should identify the associated video Its unclear if recordings are admissible in court, but if so, they should be available to both the prosecution and the defense The public should be educated about the mechanisms that cause the in-car video to turn on automatically Educate the police that having the camera on is in their best interest If video recording provides evidence of a crime being committed that has nothing to do with the incident being lmed, it should not be allowed as evidence in that other case
Some believe the police have destroyed videos sought in discovery or only release parts of videos they want Many feel increased use of in-car videos will help increase public trust of SPD, make people feel safer, help to reduce bias to show the court and public in order to hid evidence and use of force, increase ofcer professionalism, and support of excessive use of force or bias ofcer training and accountability Some express concern that ofcers tamper with Many think the cameras should be on all the time, or wanted recordings or allowed discretion in turning on more information about when exceptions would be allowed; recording devices they are generally not in favor of ofcer discretion Some believe current recording policies are not Some asked about the need for recordings of ofcers who are consistently followed not in vehicles (bikes/horses/Segways) and many thought Many expressed concern about ofcers harassing bystanders there is value in requiring police to use body cameras and telling them it is illegal for them to record police actions Some noted the value of audio recordings and that requirements for these recordings should be part of the policy, operating in conjunction with ICV, recording in vehicles and carried by each ofcer While wanting recordings widely available to the public, many expressed concern about maintaining privacy and thought the policy should address this difcult issue; there were mixed opinions on how videos should be made public The police should be required to notify people that the camera is on Some raised the question of accountability and how the policy will ensure footage is not tampered with, is captured and tracked, and how broken equipment will be reported and xed (ofcers must be required to report malfunctioning or off equipment); some thought it would be useful to have a third party (independent, external community organization) provide oversight and accountability The policy needs to explain how compliance will be tracked There should be signicant penalties for not following recording protocols or for tampering with video evidence
63
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesSPD (General)

Positive comments
People are reluctant to give SPD a chance (youth distrust, history of difculties, lack of faith that change is possible), but many have hope that it will be different this time There is a lack of police engagement with communities; both community police ofcers and beat ofcers should form relationships with communities Some believe there are many good and courteous ofcers; a single bad ofcer taints the reputation of the whole Department Law enforcement ofcers at a meeting stated that the selection of ofcers these days has improved SPD tries to nd ofcers who represent the communities being served Some noted they had experienced positive, respectful interactions with ofcers (many of the district council representatives and SPD advisory groups; also individual ofcers dealing with individuals who were mentally ill or intoxicated Many youth pointed to examples of ofcers they trust. Youth participants reported that characteristics of a good cop are the ones who: Help kids Warn youth to stay on track Talk about choices Can relate to young peoples challenges Multiple young people served by Teen Feed noted and appreciated positive, respectful interactions with or lenient responses to minor criminal acts by SPD ofcers
Areas of concern
Multiple communities have negative attitudes and deep distrust of SPD, and in many cases fear police; for some, there is a lack of trust in the entire criminal justice system Some communities have mixed feelings about SPD, with some of their members not having good relations or experience with police Some people feel they would not contact the police unless absolutely necessary and, in some cases, their attitudes are a result of police and government practices in their home countries SPD may not be able to transform due to entrenched institutional and historical reasons SPD protects its own and dont hold each other accountable Some of the formal communication channels that currently exist between the police and the community dont feel very effective and could be improved The majority of ofcers do not live in city limits, so there is little to no community investment or community building occurring Several people believe SPD takes action against homeless people as a result of pressure from business owners, rather than being responsive to the community Some reported contacting the police for help and being treated as if they were a criminal In the Little Saigon area, there is concern that there are not enough police; one person said it took ofcers two hours to show up at the scene of a hitand-run and some businesses are hesitant to report crime due to a fear of retaliation In the black community a concern was raised that SPD does not solve crimes in a timely manner; there was feedback that response time to 9-1-1 calls is slower in some neighborhoods Some feedback that the complaint process is useless and staff who answer the phones are apathetic and unhelpful Police ofcers appeared to be judgmental about the CPC outreach effort conducted in Steinbrueck Park
New ideas and recommendations

Ofcers throughout SPD (not just the West Precinct) need to have mandatory training and obtain skills to deal with a host of cultural and other issues; the needs specically cited include de-escalation and crisis intervention skills (e.g. to be able to deal effectively with those with mental illness) There were multiple suggestions for police to better connect with the communities they serve. Ideas included: Have more foot patrols and have ofcers engage more with community members while on foot patrols Encourage all ofcers to take part in Living Room Conversations so they better understand the communities they serve Ofcers should be rotated among numerous communities so they gain experience of different cultures and so the potential for harassing individuals is interrupted; in contrast, others cited ofcer rotation as a problem in establishing strong relationships with communities Provide opportunities where police directly meet in the community with community members to get to know them and to talk about reforms; this will build trust that the police want to make needed changes Participate in community service and events Have more friendly conversations with community More ofcers should live in Seattle (one suggestion is that 60% of street ofcers should live in the city) More communication, in more languages, and in more accessible formats Use local papers to keep community in the loop on whats new and policy updates Engage more with students and youth organizations People noted the difference between community police vs. beat copspeople know community police by name and trust them; we need more community police Examine performance evaluation process Establish a culture that encourages mental health and coping support of ofcers, including counseling services Find ways for ofcers to develop empathy and compassion Need buyin from leadership in order to hold ofcers accountable There needs to be an accountability structure that works and that is observable in order to create trust (i.e. set up a survey to comment on ofcer interactions) Develop capacity in our neighborhoods to work together with the police and having more positive interactions between police and ethnic-minority people Community perceptions of SPD are impacted by policies and actions of other jurisdictions such as the King County Sheriffs Ofce, and other nearby police departments; people want to know if general reform proposals and specic policies under consideration (bias, stops, use of force, video recording) will or can have impact on these other departments Immigrant students (Seattle World School) were interested in learning more about SPD and would like to see ofcers in their schools/neighborhoods People want to be treated with respect and poor police treatment adversely impacts feelings of selfworth
64
APPENDIX F
Key ThemesCPC and the Outreach Process

Positive comments
Use of partners gave CPC more access to a broad range of communities; in some cases, it worked well to conduct outreach at meetings where people were already getting together rather than trying to host special events; small meetings worked wellgave people comfortable place to disclose their views Even with serious time constraints, the results exceeded CPC expectations Many are supportive of the CPCs work, and appreciate the forums held to gather input People appreciate that the CPC is receptive to community feedback People are interested in having more opportunities to give feedback and engage in discussion on this issue; favorable response to plans for outreach and CPC work in coming year Partners are very interested in ongoing involvement with the outreach process While there is some skepticism, people support the police reform process that is underway
Areas of concern
Some noted that organizations they are associated with chose to not respond to the CPCs RFP because the timeline was unrealistic and it would be difcult to obtain meaningful feedback The timeline for feedback made it difcult to engage all who should have been heard from; some important coordinating organizations and communities were missed (indigenous people and Native people who identify across LGBTQ spectrum, and people with disabilities, and possibly others; partners do not have capacity to handle similar constraints in futurethey estimate they need one month to plan and one month to implement outreach Some materials, especially the PowerPoint, were too complicated and it was difcult to convey all the information in short meetings; the survey worked well as a tool to walk-through topic areas It was difcult getting toolkit materials in a timely way, especially translated materials, which complicated an already short turn-around window for community feedback Some people thought due to its name that the CPC is part of SPD and not independent; some had concern and a level of distrust Due to lack of knowledge of and condence in the CPC, there is a question of whether it will be serious in following through with the recommendations; questions of how and when they will know action has been taken Some are concerned that the CPC recommendations wont be seriously considered; the CPC may have little or no inuence; after the outreach process, concern was also raised that the CPCs policy recommendations were submitted prior to a complete accounting of the community feedback Some wonder how/why this time will be any different than the past; how will DOJ hold SPD accountable Some concern about whether commissioners adequately represent all areas of the city as required by ordinance The survey appears to have suggestions that dont correspond to the actual policy recommendations Concern that material in Somali was not accurately translated; the majority prefer English versions; problems were also identied with the Spanish translations Immigrants and refugees had trouble with the questionnaire because it was dense, and had unfamiliar concepts and terminology Some concern that so much money is involved with the settlement ($5 million), but none of it is being used in the community to address the problem.
New ideas and recommendations

Many were not familiar with the CPC, so build more awareness of it and share information through community blogs and papers; need more visible use of mediaboth traditional and social regarding CPC and its role and activities Provide more education and information that the reform process is court-driven, not SPD-driven Provide community education about institutional racism and encourage dialogue about the use of power as concerns race, gender and class Provide resources and tools so community groups can conduct educational outreach People in the community need to be clear on their rights and how to le a complaint; offer workshops conducted by the ACLU and similar organizations, and the OPA Many are interested in tracking the CPCs work and the policy implementation, and would like to participate in training sessions (as described above) Notify public about trainings, information shared, and who is conducting them Provide opportunities for community feedback and participation in trainings Upcoming CPC work areas are challenging; CPC needs to simplify complex concepts that may not be familiar to the public and translate these into language that is easier to understand, and clarify and condense presentation materials Some partners suggested that they be asked to participate in designing CPCs 2014 outreach plan Engage with the community on an ongoing basis, not just when seeking feedback on policy recommendations; consider attending regular meetings that are held in different parts of the city and also hold quarterly or regular meetings out in the community The CPC should focus on more communication with the community and seek community support when needed to ensure CPC can fulll its charge Be open to dialogue and questioning to ensure transparency Hold a larger community meeting with all interested parties to identify common interests and overlap Participants want to know the outcome of this process and whether recommendations are adopted, policies and practices change; what impact might labor negotiations have and how will citizens know SPD has made reform progress? Some believe community meetings should be held to get feedback and suggestions before CPC recommendations are developed Make sure the greater community is concerned about these issues and call for justice. Its going to take time, more than just policies, to create condence in SPD Interest in whether a similar process has occurred elsewhere and the results.
65
66

Seattle Outreach Report 01-24-14

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seattle Outreach Report 01-24-14

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Community Police Commission

Community Outreach Report

Our city. Our safety. Our police. Better together.

In Appreciation of Kip Tokuda

III. Outreach Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

IV. Current Status and Next Steps

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

Core values in engaging the community

Seattle Community Police Commission

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

Creating change that will endure

CPC and partners in reform

o How d ate we cre change?

Cch tham Dhab ahaan, ammaanka dadweynaha gia: Magkomento

Our ciudad raty. Nuest safe Our

ta. Cng nhau

Our city. Our safety. Our police. Better together.

Community Police Commission Questionnaire

Seattle Community Police Commission

The 2013 Community Outreach Process

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

Policies to Improve SPDs Performance

Interaction with SPD and the Accountability Process

Key Themes from Community Meetings

Seattle Community Police Commission

Stops and Detentions

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

In-Car Video Recordings

Current Status and Next Steps for 2014

Review of Adopted Policies

Ideas for Future Change

Seattle Community Police Commission

Review and Recommendations on SPD Outreach

Data Analysis and Recommendations Regarding Patterns in Enforcement Actions

Review and Recommendations on SPD Accountability

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

Seattle Community Police Commission

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

I. The Seattle Community Police Commission

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

II. The 2013 Community Outreach Process

Seattle Community Police Commission

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

12 percent of the survey

Capitol Hill Central District

72 percent of the surveys were

completed by individuals who identied themselves as people of color.

Over 24 percent of the survey respondents identied as an immigrant or refugee.

Seattle Community Police Commission

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

III. Outreach Results

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

Seattle Community Police Commission

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

Community Outreach Report | January 2014

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT

were 17 or younger. The complete age breakout of respondents is shown below:

Community perceptions and experience

Seattle Community Police Commission

COMMUNITY OUTREACH REPORT