Law Enforcement, Race, and Reconciliation

Law Enforcement, Race,and Reconciliation

IN WASHINGTON STATEThe Hope and Promise of One State's Efforts To Seek Justice and Promote Trust

National Crime Prevention Council

M I S S I O N

S T A T E M E N T

To enable people to create safer and more caring communities by addressing the causes of crime and violence and reducing the opportunities for crime to occur.

The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) is a private, nonprofit tax-exempt [501(c)(3)] organizationwhose primary mission is to enable people to create safer and more caring communities by addressing thecauses of crime and violence and reducing the opportunities for crime to occur. NCPC publishes books, kitsof camera-ready program materials, posters, and informational and policy reports on a variety of crime pre-vention and community-building subjects. NCPC offers training, technical assistance, and a national focusfor crime prevention: it acts as secretariat for the Crime Prevention Coalition of America, more than 4,000national, federal, state, and local organizations committed to preventing crime. It hosts a number of websitesthat offer prevention tips to individuals, describe prevention practices for community building, and helpanchor prevention policy into laws and budgets. It operates demonstration programs in schools, neighbor-hoods, and entire jurisdictions and takes a major leadership role in youth crime prevention and youth service;it also administers the Center for Faith and Service. NCPC manages the McGruff® “Take A Bite Out OfCrime®” public service advertising campaign. NCPC is funded through a variety of government agencies,corporate and private foundations, and donations from private individuals.

This publication was supported by Grant No. 2002-HS-WX-0060 by the U.S. Department of Justice Officeof Community Oriented Policing Services. Points of view or opinions contained in this document are thoseof the author and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department ofJustice.

Copyright © 2003 National Crime Prevention CouncilAll rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of AmericaDecember 2003

National Crime Prevention Council1000 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Thirteenth FloorWashington, DC 20036-5325202-466-6272www.ncpc.org

ISBN 1-929888-32-5

Acknowledgments

The National Crime Prevention Councilwishes to acknowledge the outstanding workand support of a number of individuals whohave contributed to this publication. Thepublication and summit activities could nothave been brought to fruition without theleadership and financial support of KingCounty Sheriff Dave Reichert and the KingCounty Sheriff’s Office. Rev. Donovan L.Rivers, a faith leader in Washington State,contributed to the design of the summit andbrought significant hope and wisdom to theprocess. We also wish to acknowledge JamesE. Copple, former vice president for publicpolicy and program development, the princi-pal writer of this publication and designer ofthe summit. Darryl Jones, NCPC vice presi-

dent, and Monica Palacio, director of trainingfor NCPC, contributed to the writing of thedocument and facilitated numerous inter-views and meetings with law enforcement andthe diverse communities in WashingtonState. Many NCPC staff worked hard duringthe planning and implementation of the sum-mit. Their contribution made this eventpossible. Judy Kirby, director, and SusanHunt, editor, NCPC Publications and Information Services, saw the documentthrough editing and production. And,finally, an event of this importance and sig-nificance could not have been successfullyachieved without the support and commit-ment of John A. Calhoun, NCPC presidentand CEO.

i

Introduction

Forty years after the passage of the CivilRights Act, Americans still struggle withracism and equal access to justice. Whilemajor progress has been made in the creationof political and economic opportunity forpeople of color, highly publicized confronta-tions between minority groups and lawenforcement often overshadow this progress.In the United States today, for example,

More than three-quarters of a million blackmen are now behind bars, and nearly 2 millionare under some form of correctional supervi-sion, including probation and parole. For blackmales ages twenty-five to thirty-four, at a timein life when they would otherwise be startingfamilies and careers, one of every eight is inprison or jail on any given day.1

While these realities are part of the dailystruggle, not just for African Americans butfor many minorities, both law enforcementand minority groups are committed toaddressing these issues.

In King County, Washington, there werenine officer-involved shootings of minoritiesin as many years. An investigation or inquestdetermined that each shooting was justified,and the officer was protecting himself or thecommunity. Over the years, these results havecontinued to exacerbate an already tense andexplosive situation. To a number of minority

leaders in the community, questions of bias,institutional racism, and a perceived cultureof racial insensitivity within law enforcementcompounded the problem. In this context,racism was not just a question of prejudicebased on skin color or other historical defini-tions of “race”; it included bias and discrimi-nation against any group based on a part ofthat group’s identity, such as religion, immi-gration status, language, or country of origin.

This concern was not unique to Seattle orKing County; it was a problem throughoutthe state of Washington. King County Sher-iff Dave Reichert, the president of the Wash-ington State Sheriff’s Association, challengedhis organization to take a fresh look at issuesof diversity, officer recruitment and training,and communication with minority groupsand new refugee populations. At the sametime, the Rev. Donovan L. Rivers, the AfricanAmerican pastor of the Mt. Calvary of FaithApostolic Church and founder of the Apos-tolic Clergy Advisory Council, was chal-lenging his congregation and the leadership ofthe minority community to engage in a dia-log with law enforcement about diversity and inclusiveness. “Confrontation may callattention to the problem,” said Rivers, “but dialog and action are the only road toreconciliation.”

1

In August 2002, Sheriff Reichert andRev. Rivers met with leadership from theNational Crime Prevention Council (NCPC)to plan a summit that would focus on specificstrategies and actions to improve communi-cation between law enforcement and themany diverse communities within Washing-ton State. NCPC designed a two-day summitutilizing the facilitation model of Apprecia-tive Inquiry. Appreciative Inquiry begins withthe premise that certain actions and systemshave enhanced communication and under-standing and that problem-solving shouldfocus on re-creating those approaches.

In preparation for the summit, the NCPCteam met with approximately 180 individualsfrom 37 groups and organizations to identifycommon themes or problems. These inter-views helped the team identify four areas ofracial reconciliation—trust, reconciliation, jus-tice, and leadership and service. The summitfocused on these areas, and recommendationswere developed for each.

These recommendations became theplatform or bridge across the many differ-ences between law enforcement and thediverse racial and ethnic groups in Wash-ington State. Summit participants are nowworking toward the implementation of therecommendations.

This document describes the back-ground, the process, and the outcomes of thesummit experience. We hope it will provideyou, the reader, with an understanding of theissues, challenges, and opportunities foraddressing the racial and cultural divides thatoften result from inadequate training andcommunication skills.

Background

Race matters! For the past decade this simple,declarative sentence has generated contro-versy in the United States. In 1993, Cornel

West, now professor of Afro-American stud-ies and philosophy of religion at HarvardUniversity, wrote that despite legislativeachievements, economic and social gains, andthe integration of basic institutions, race stillmatters in this country. West dedicated hisbook, Race Matters, to his son: “To my won-derful son Clifton Louis West who combatsdaily the hidden injuries of race with the mostpotent of weapons—love of self and others.”2

In the decade since the publication of RaceMatters, not much has improved, accordingto West and his students.

Race matters because, in 2003, AfricanAmerican males are more likely than whitemales to be pulled over for traffic violations,and, in the state of Maryland, they are morethan twice as likely as white males to be giventhe death penalty.3 Race matters becausemany people of color hailing cabs in NewYork City suffer the indignity of watchingempty cabs pass them by to pick up fares fromthe white population. Race matters because in2003 the United States Supreme Court is stillsorting out the ramifications of affirmativeaction in admission policies at public univer-sities. Race matters because in WashingtonState and other host states, refugees fromSomalia or migrant farm workers from Mex-ico, who have yet to master English, are oftenignored by local and state law enforcementofficials at traffic accidents because there is noone to interpret or translate for them. Andrace matters because in Washington State, asin so many other states, a lack of financialresources has hampered the ability of lawenforcement to train officers in how to dealwith these complex, volatile, and sometimesdeadly situations.

Whether it is racial profiling, a hot topicin policing, or the suspicion many Americansfeel toward Arab Americans since September11, 2001, the racial and ethnic divide in thiscountry continues to weaken the fabric of

2 Law Enforcement, Race, and Reconciliation in Washington State

America. The divide is real for it is still a topicof conversation and concern in our schools,workplaces, houses of worship, and in thehalls of Congress.

Because race matters, Cornel West sug-gests that we must confront these realitieswith “a new spirit and vision to meet the chal-lenges” of a new century and a new millen-nium. While West’s remarks are primarilydirected toward an African American audi-ence, it is a message that all of us must exam-ine, regardless of race, ethnicity, or culture.He suggests the following:

First we must admit that the most valuablesources for help, hope, and power consist ofourselves and our common history. As in theages of Lincoln, Roosevelt, and King, we mustlook to new frameworks and languages tounderstand our multilayered crisis and over-come our deep malaise.

Second, we must focus our attention on thepublic square—the common good that under-girds our national and global destinies. Thevitality of any public square ultimately dependson how much we care about the quality of ourlives together. . . .

We must invigorate the common good with amixture of government, business, and labor thatdoes not follow any existing blueprint. . . .

Last, the major challenge is to meet the need togenerate new leadership. The paucity of coura-geous leaders . . . requires that we look beyondthe same elites and voices that recycle the olderframeworks. We need leaders—neither saintsnor sparkling television personalities—who cansituate themselves within a larger historical nar-rative of this country and our world, who cangrasp the complex dynamics of our peoplehoodand imagine a future grounded in the best ofour past, yet who are attuned to the frighteningobstacles that now perplex us.4

West’s admonitions are a challenge for allof us. We must find a language that connectsus to what is good in our past, yet relevant toour current crisis. We must engage these is-sues in the public square and not be trapped

by failed models or approaches; we must bewilling to explore new ways of thinking in ourefforts to achieve reconciliation, trust, justice,and service. New leadership embracing thenew language of hope and reconciliationmust replace entrenched approaches that aredehumanizing and destructive. It is in thiscontext that the hidden injuries of race can behealed and a climate of reconciliation andhope can flourish.

The Situation in King County, Washington

Sheriff Dave Reichert, the first elected sheriffof King County, Washington, in 30 years, hasbecome a legend in the state. For years he wasthe lead investigator of the task force workingto solve the notorious Green River Murders of49 women in the Pacific Northwest whosebodies were found in and around the GreenRiver. Reichert took on the challenge of theinvestigation, which led to the identificationand arrest of Gary Leon Ridgway, who ulti-mately pleaded guilty to 48 murders. The feel-ing in the county was that there was nothingpassive about Dave Reichert; he would faceany challenge to the safety and well-being ofthe 1.6 million citizens of King County withcommitment, resolve, and determination.

King County, which is named after Mar-tin Luther King Jr., comprises 37 separatejurisdictions. It has a richly diverse popula-tion of African Americans, Latinos, AsianPacific Islanders, Native Americans, South-east Asians, Chinese, and new refugees fromthe Middle East and Africa. King County andWashington State have a tradition of racialdiversity. Ron Sims, an African American, hasserved as county executive for nearly eightyears. He has pushed to create access tocounty government. A Democrat, Sims isoften seen as a future candidate for governor,as is Sheriff Reichert, a Republican. Now theywere faced with a tense situation following

Law Enforcement, Race, and Reconciliation in Washington State 3

several shootings involving minorities andlocal law enforcement agencies.

On April 7, 2002, off-duty King CountySheriff’s Deputy Melvin Miller fatally shotRobert Thomas Sr. The facts around theshooting are still in dispute, but as the SeattleTimes reported:

The killing of a black man by a white policemansparked protests that underscored the distrustand animosity of law enforcement in commu-nities of color. Reichert and King County Pros-ecutor Norm Maleng were vilified by someAfrican Americans for refusing to fire or prose-cute Miller, who said he acted in self-defense.An inquest jury concluded the shooting was jus-tified.5

Public statements from executive leader-ship in law enforcement sent mixed messagesto the minority community and to rank-and-file cops. Although police executives soughtto navigate the minefields of internal investi-gations and to appease the community’s de-mand for more information, nobody seemedsatisfied.

For several months, demonstrations wereheld at the county courthouse and throughoutWashington State. King County’s problemscast light on other counties in WashingtonState, and critics of local law enforcementpointed to a number of shootings and inci-dents that sparked concern about law enforce-ment’s use of force in minority communities.There had been nine shootings in as manyyears. The Seattle Police Department, theKing County Sheriff’s Office, and other lawenforcement agencies throughout the statebecame targets of investigation and criticism.

This animosity and distrust were notnew. In 1999 the demonstrations surround-ing the World Trade Organization confer-ence—and the response of the Seattle PoliceDepartment—had badly eroded public con-fidence in law enforcement, and it had costthe chief of police his job.

Washington State also faced budget real-ities that compounded these concerns. In2002, state and county government beganmaking dramatic cuts in programs and ser-vices, allowing only for the basic essentials. Bythe time of the summit in November 2002,Washington State was approaching a $2 bil-lion deficit. Cuts were made in crime preven-tion programs, community liaison programsin law enforcement, and basic cultural aware-ness training for law enforcement officers.These efforts were significantly reduced oreliminated entirely throughout the state.Thus, at a time when more community inter-action was desperately needed, budget cutswere further reducing law enforcement’sneighborhood presence. Both law enforce-ment and community leaders were frustratedand unhappy with this situation.

Now, in response to community outragefollowing the death of Robert Thomas Sr.and the exoneration of Deputy MelvinMiller, law enforcement agencies within thestate began to explore ways to restore publicconfidence and to defuse a potentially explo-sive situation. Budget cuts, accusations ofracism in the culture of law enforcement, andgrowing media coverage of minority concernsabout law enforcement demanded coura-geous and innovative leadership from policeexecutives and community leaders. Oldstrategies were not working. Furthermore, thecharacterization that the issues were largelybetween blacks and whites hindered thedevelopment of a meaningful, comprehensivesolution.

In the midst of the dissent and mediacoverage of the more vociferous critics, newleadership from the minority communitysuggested that transformation, reform, andcooperation could be achieved through con-versation rather than confrontation. At thecenter of this effort was the Rev. Donovan L.Rivers, pastor of the Mt. Calvary of Faith


Apostolic Church and founder of the Apos-tolic Clergy Advisory Council.

Rev. Rivers was no stranger to conflict.He had grown up in a Detroit communitythat was ravaged by gang violence, and as ayoung man he had witnessed his father’s vio-lent death as well as those of other familymembers. Rivers had survived gang shoot-ings, and his ministry was characterized byattempts to prevent what he had witnessedfirsthand as a child. He began to facilitatemeetings between Sheriff Reichert and lead-ers of faith-based groups and local coalitionsin the Seattle/King County area. After meet-ing with some of these groups, Reichertunderstood that their anger was not only aresponse to the situation but also a symptomof an underlying problem—the failure of lawenforcement to provide accurate information,to create channels of communication withcommunity groups, and, most important, toestablish relationships with the diverse minor-ity groups of Washington State.

In August 2002, Reichert, Rivers, andRalph Ibarra, a Hispanic business leader, metwith representatives of the National CrimePrevention Council (NCPC) at the secondannual Methamphetamine Summit in Spo-kane, Washington. Reichert had a vision:what if the Washington State Sheriff’s Asso-ciation and the Apostolic Clergy AdvisoryCouncil worked together to sponsor a sum-mit on law enforcement, race, and reconcili-ation? Perhaps, Reichert and Rivers hoped, ameaningful dialog could occur that wouldlead to concrete and specific solutions.Reichert wanted more than talk. He envi-sioned a summit that would produce mean-ingful change in the state. His goal was tomove beyond the accusations of the citizen’sgroups and the defensiveness of law enforce-ment to find common ground and then workto change the situation of mistrust and mis-understanding.

Reichert and Rivers became allies in theeffort to move both the state and the countytoward a new era of racial collaboration.Reichert and Rivers and several of their staffmet with the NCPC team—Jim Copple,then vice president for public policy and pro-gram development; Darryl Jones, vice presi-dent for coalition and law enforcementtraining services; Monica Palacio, director ofWeed and Seed Initiatives; and MichaelWood, then director of training. The conver-sation focused on the need for a new languageto achieve reconciliation and racial under-standing and for core solutions that wentbeyond policy and program: citizens neededto understand the day-to-day culture of lawenforcement, and law enforcement needed tounderstand the changing cultural environ-ments of the community. Solutions needed tobe more than cosmetic; they needed toaddress the underlying feelings of distrust andalienation. The search for forgiveness, heal-ing, reconciliation, trust, and leadership andservice became an essential part of the plan-ning. “This is about the heart,” declared Rev.Rivers. And Sheriff Reichert agreed: “Anysolution to our cultural differences that doesnot take into consideration the hearts andsouls of our neighbors is doomed to fail.”

Appreciative Inquiry

The Washington Summit would use Appre-ciative Inquiry (AI), a new and creativeprocess that focuses on healing the divide.Rather than dwelling on problems, this facil-itation process encourages participants tolearn from what has “worked right” in thepast. AI focuses on participants’ positive expe-riences in their struggles to solve complexissues. The NCPC team determined thatAppreciative Inquiry would help organizersdevelop an event that would move partici-pants toward creative problem solving, ratherthan yet another event where debate andanalysis dominated the conversation.


Two of AI’s architects, Joe Hall and SueHammond, describe Appreciative Inquiry asa “complex philosophy that engages the entiresystem in an inquiry about what works.”6

In contrast to the traditional organiza-tional development process, which focuses onwhat’s wrong (define the problem and fixwhat’s broken), AI searches for solutions thatalready exist, amplifies what works, andfocuses on a positive approach. In otherwords, the traditional process asks, “Whatproblems are you having?” AI asks, “What isworking well?”7

Individuals, groups, and organizationshave a micro-story around most issues.Regardless of race, gender, or ethnic back-ground, most of the participants in Washing-ton State’s efforts to deal with racial tensionand conflict had experienced some form ofbias, prejudice, or abuse because of theirbeliefs, physical characteristics, religion, orcountry of origin. Although certainly manyhad experienced more intense degrees of bias

and prejudice, every individual could relate tosome form of bias or prejudice. The goal ofthe interviews and eventually of the summititself was to get participants to “dig deep” intotheir experiences in order to tell their ownstories of bias or prejudice and of healing andreconciliation.

Interviews and Model Development

In preparation for the summit, the NCPCteam— Jim Copple, Darryl Jones, and Mon-ica Palacio—made three trips to WashingtonState to interview community leaders aboutthe racial and cultural divide. The team met with 37 organizations and groups and180 individuals to discuss their concerns.Interview participants were identified andinvited by Sheriff Reichert’s office and theApostolic Clergy Advisory Council. Thediversity of the interviewers (Jones, a retiredpolice officer, is African American; Palacio,


AI’s eight key assumptions guided both the NCPC interviews thatpreceded the summit and the summit itself. These assumptions are

1. In every society, organization, or group, something works.2. What we focus on becomes our reality.3. Reality is created in the moment, and there are multiple reali-

ties.4. The act of asking questions of an organization or group influ-

ences the group in some way.5. People have more confidence and comfort to journey to the

future (the unknown) when they carry forward parts of the past(the known).

6. If we carry parts of the past forward, they should be what is bestabout the past.

7. It is important to value differences.8. The language we use creates our reality.8

The structured interviews followed theAI process and included five questions:

1. What is your organizational back-ground and interest in the issuesfacing Washington State?

2. What worked right in your relation-ship with law enforcement or com-munity-based organizations?

3. What were the areas of frustrationin your work with law enforcementor community-based organizations?

4. What elements of what was workingright could be applied to the challenges or frustrations youexperienced with law enforcementor community-based organizations?

5. What recommendations or themesshould the summit address?

born in Bogotá, Colombia, is Latina; Coppleis part Caucasian and part Kiowa) gave themcredibility in their conversations with a broadrange of individuals and organizations.

Some interview participants had strongfeelings and considerable cynicism about thesuccess of the summit. Most complained thatthey had seen these efforts before, and theywere skeptical about the long-term impact.However, the one mitigating factor for thiscynicism was the presence of an outside orga-nization committed to helping facilitate thesummit and providing leadership in the effortto implement summit recommendations.

Interview Findings

The meetings held with community leadersand potential summit participants were someof the richest the NCPC team had ever ex-perienced as community organizers. Theconversations were filled with personal expe-riences and provided both an emotional anda political context for what needed to beaccomplished. Clearly there was anger aboutnumerous incidents that had polarized lawenforcement and the community. Whether itwas four officer-involved shootings of peopleof color in the past two years or the complexissue of racial profiling and the increasingawareness that often minority young peoplewere being pulled over and questioned bypolice simply because they were DWB(“driving while black”), anger and even ragewere just below the surface of many of theinterviews. Yet each conversation generatedhope that things could change if the commu-nity could begin getting their communicationright and holding conversations beyond theTV cameras.

The ideas generated from these initialconversations covered the spectrum from theprofoundly simple to the complicated. Wash-ington State Senator Paull Shin (an AsianAmerican and a historian) said, “Tell every-

one we should love each other and we willmake great accomplishments.” In contrast,King County Superior Court Judge SteveGonzalez (a Latino) felt that the criminal jus-tice system needed to be reformed. The prob-lems took years to create, he said, and thesolutions would take years to implement.Given the disproportionate number of peopleof color in the criminal justice system, that isone area where a change in both heart andpolicy is needed.

Rev. Doug Wheeler, director of ZionPreparatory Academy, a private school inSeattle’s Rainier Valley, argued forcefully that law enforcement should recognize andacknowledge that the community is chang-ing, that law enforcement lacks understand-ing of the immigrant groups and minorities inthe bedroom communities of Seattle, andthat what is needed is empathy. Wheeler said,“None of us really want to know the depth ofthe problem,” adding that it is often too easyto hide behind a badge or a clerical collar. Butwhen asked by the NCPC team whether hethought reconciliation was possible, he re-sponded, “Yes, yes, I have to believe that rec-onciliation is possible!”

The team interviewed Roberto Maestasof El Centro de la Raza, an elder Chicanostatesman of both the civil rights movementand community economic development inthe Pacific Northwest. Maestas was a con-temporary of Cesar Chavez and one of theorganizers of the United Farm Workers. In1972 he and several colleagues took over aschool that was scheduled for closing in theirneighborhood in Seattle; they are still there.From this building, they developed a widerange of cultural and political activities thathave made them a force for change in thecommunity. But Maestas had seen so manyfailed attempts to convince law enforcementand community leaders to be more inclusiveand to create a just and equitable environ-


ment for community change that he was notoptimistic about the summit. No one fromhis organization attended the event. How-ever, in the follow-up meetings to the sum-mit, Maestas committed staff and energy tohelp guide the implementation of the recom-mendations.

The team’s meeting with a diverse rangeof refugee groups from Somalia and South-east Asia was possibly the most helpful.Approximately 30 individuals representingabout 15 different organizations met with theteam at a United Way career developmentcenter to discuss their relationships with lawenforcement. The group reminded the orga-nizers that this was not just a black/whiteissue; their communities had experiencedpolice harassment and profiling as well. It waswith this population that the misunderstand-ings in language and culture were the mostpronounced. Meeting participants cited sev-eral examples of law enforcement officersarriving at the scene of an accident or domes-tic dispute and believing the story of thenative English speaker rather than the non-English-speaking person. In many such inci-dents, no one was present who could translatefor the immigrant, and consequently that per-son’s story did not get told.

Issues of religious discrimination also sur-faced with this group, especially with Mus-lims. Muslims in the room expressed strongfears about how they were treated by lawenforcement because of their religion. Theycited example after example of profiling. AfterSeptember 11, hate crime incidents such asthose described in the box9 compoundedtheir fears. For the most part, refugees felt iso-lated, and they worried about police protec-tion in an environment that was hostile toMuslims.

The Asian and refugee community feltthat their only option was silence. Theybelieved that to speak up would only invite

retaliation or further discrimination. Theconsensus was that trust and justice—themost important elements in the relationshipwith law enforcement—were lacking. Al-though members of this community were notoptimistic about the outcomes of the summit,they expressed enthusiasm for the effort. Oneperson seemed to act on behalf of the groupwhen he extended his open hand as a symbolof his willingness to help. And one of the lead-ers promised, “We will be there to help makechange happen.”

The law enforcement and criminal justicecommunity brought an interesting perspectiveto the discussion. Participants’ views were as


Hate Crime in Washington State

� On September 13, 2001, PatrickCunningham, 53, drove 25 miles from his Snohomishhome to Seattle’s Sheihk IdrissMosque. He attempted to set fireto two cars at the mosque andshot at worshippers. None washit, and Cunningham laterpleaded guilty to the assaults.

� In mid-October 2001, JohnBethel entered a SeaTac moteland hit its Sikh owner with ametal cane, sending him to thehospital for ten stitches. Bethellater was sentenced to nearlytwo years for the assault.

� Masjid Omar al-Farooq Mosquein Mountlake Terrace was amongsix places of worship nationwidethat were victims of arson orattempted arson. Two local teenswere charged with harassment,and one of the teens was alsocharged with second-degreearson.

diverse and complicated as any the team hadmet in the community-based discussions. RosaMelendez, regional director of the U.S.Department of Justice’s Community RelationsService (CRS) in Seattle, said that “officersafety issues could be addressed if [they were]dealt with in an intercultural context . . . work-ing toward building conflict resolution skills.”CRS mediates many of the conflicts thatemerge between diverse ethnic groups and lawenforcement. CRS also provides skill trainingto raise cultural awareness among organiza-tions and neighborhood groups working withlaw enforcement.

The initial team meeting with the KingCounty Police Officers Guild offered lit-tle promise. Neighborhood groups, ethnicgroups, and their respective associationsreferred to the Police Guild as “the elephantin the living-room” (the obvious subject no one wanted to discuss). Many of thecommunity-based organizations were suspi-cious of the guild because of its defense ofguild members in officer-involved shootings.Media images of the guild rallying to supportmembers before an inquest or investigationhad angered many in the community. Onecommunity health worker asked, “Who isrunning the [Seattle] police department—the chief or the guild?”

The tension between law enforcementand the minority communities had beenheightened by the execution-style killing ofSheriff’s Deputy Richard Herzog in June2002, just two months after Robert ThomasSr. was shot. Herzog was killed when heattempted to apprehend an African Americanman, Ronald Keith Matthews, who had beenrunning naked in the street. It was later deter-mined that Matthews had been using cocaineat the time of the murder and was also suffer-ing from a mental disorder. Guild membersfelt that the minority communities had notresponded to Herzog’s death with the outcry

and support with which they had respondedto the death of Thomas.

At the initial meeting, guild membersshowed a great deal of defensiveness. They feltthat they had made significant progress incommunity policing and community out-reach and were now being stereotyped by asmall group of minority leaders. One guildmember said that any efforts to make changeswere met with criticism. “Why bother anymore?” he asked. Yet among the guild leader-ship there was an effort to move beyond accu-sations and defensiveness and proceed to aresolution of the conflict. One Seattle policeofficer admitted, “We do not sell ourselvesvery well.”

The guild called for more training, andguild members insisted that it should be morethan just sensitivity training; it should includeeducation about the language and culturalhistory of new refugee groups. It turned outthat the guild would be a valuable and enthu-siastic participant in the summit.

Participants from the law enforcementcommunity acknowledged that they had notkept pace with the changing demographics ofthe state. In the past, there had been lawenforcement appreciation dinners held invarious ethnic neighborhoods and worshipservices that included recognition of law en-forcement officers and firefighters. There wasmore dialog in the past. All of the participantspressed for the restoration of these kinds ofsimple, no- or low-cost solutions.

Law enforcement and community leadersagreed that whites in Washington State wereinclined to give law enforcement a high ratingwhile African Americans were more likely toexpress intense distrust of law enforcement.“This divide,” said Larry Gossett, a memberof the King County Council, “must bebridged if we are to make any progress.”

Rev. Harriet Walden, executive directorof Mothers for Police Accountability, spoke


at length about the challenges of workingwith law enforcement. But when she wasasked the Appreciative Inquiry question,“Has there been any time when your rela-tionship with law enforcement has workedright?” she responded enthusiastically, “Ohmy word, yes!” And she described how itlooked when it did work right. At the heart ofher answer were the words “trust,” “justice,”and “leadership.” These words, with the addi-tion of “reconciliation,” became the themes ofthe summit.

The team felt that this phase of summitpreparation had produced wonderful com-ments, insights, and learnings. Participantsexpressed themselves with both humility andhope. Few wanted to seek revenge or to con-tinue to live in anger. Most participantswanted to find some common ground inorder to build a new future. All of them feltthat this work was important and necessaryand that, through it, they could begin to builda world for their children that included toler-ance, safety, and understanding.

Summit Design

Designing the summit required a balancingact. Many participants felt a strong need toaffirm and defend their own interests, butthey also recognized that it was more impor-tant for the community to move toward deci-sions and actions that would bring aboutracial, ethnic, and cultural reconciliation. Attimes these interests seemed to be in conflict.Participants who had been outside of theprocess for decades found it hard to developtrust, and those who had been on the insidefound it hard to change the way they had tra-ditionally done business. Individuals came tothe summit for a variety of reasons, but notlost on the organizers was the fact that someparticipants came just in case somethingimportant did happen. And then there were afew who came to see if the process would be

sabotaged. The result was considerable ten-sion and mistrust. Nevertheless, those in at-tendance came to the summit prepared towork.

Speakers from outside the communitywere invited; each was asked to focus on oneof the themes and its ramifications for com-munity restoration (see Appendix B for theconference agenda).

The Summit, November 2002

The summit was opened with remarks by JimCopple, Rev. Donovan L. Rivers, and RonSims, King County Executive. Copple es-tablished the context for the summit; heexpressed the concerns of the community asrevealed in the interviews, and he outlined theprocess that would guide the work of the nexttwo days. He talked about the need forcourage and cited the Old Testament story ofthe three young men who chose to enter afiery furnace, rather than abandon their faith,and emerged unharmed. He said that con-fronting the problems in King County andWashington State would take courage; itwould be like going through the fire, but thesummit participants would come out on theother side and find healing and reconciliation.

Rev. Lewis Anthony, pastor of the Met-ropolitan Wesley AME Zion Church inWashington, DC, presented the keynote


Four themes emerged from themeetings and interviews:

� Reconciliation � Trust� Justice� Leadership and service

speech. Rev. Anthony challenged participantsto “turn our enemies into our friends.” Heencouraged them to be “thermostats, notthermometers,” establishing the environmentand the climate for hope. He asked partici-pants to move beyond rhetoric and build thefuture around specific actions, and he empha-sized the need to incorporate a youth voiceinto the process (which was noticeably lack-ing from this event).

Topic keynotes were given by MichaelWalker of the Partnership for a Safer Cleve-land; Rev. Warren Dolphus from theNational Association of Blacks in CriminalJustice; Monica Palacio of NCPC; and AlfredRamirez, president of the National Commu-nity for Latino Leadership.

Sheriff Reichert reminded the participantsthat the summit process was about leadershipand that participants would be called to mobi-lize their neighbors to take specific action toimprove racial understanding and tolerance.In his speech, NCPC President and CEO JackCalhoun said that building community andcreating climates of respect and trust would goa long way toward preventing the kind of con-flict that currently existed in WashingtonState. The work would be hard, Calhoun said,but it might be the most important work par-ticipants would do. Calhoun congratulatedsummit participants for their effort to achievereconciliation, and he compared it to the com-mitment of a marriage:

You have made a magnificent commitment bybeing here. You are not saying love it or leave it.You are saying love it and improve it, criticize itand stay. And isn’t this what spouses do? Theymake their commitment concrete and positive.In the last analysis, you are in this room becauseyou care, you care about your community andyou want to make things better. You are stand-ing in the breach between chaos and order,between disconnection and connection, be-tween being a loner and being part of a com-munity that cares for all its members.

After each keynote, participants met in15 table groups. A facilitator at each tableasked participants to share a “micro-story”around the theme of the keynote. The firsttheme was reconciliation. As each participantshared an experience of reconciliation, othersoffered words of affirmation and encourage-ment, and there were occasional tears. Barri-ers of race, ethnicity, and culture seemed tobreak down, and the tension and distrustbegan to dissipate.

Following the principles of AI, the facili-tators in each group asked participants to say“what worked” in their experiences of recon-ciliation and what barriers or obstacles had tobe overcome. That process generated a listthat enabled participants to focus on whatcould be done to solve the problems. Eachgroup was asked to identify recommenda-tions—actions or strategies that had workedin their experience and that could remove achallenge or barrier to the building of recon-ciliation. The AI process was repeated for allthemes. (See Appendix A for a list of the sum-mit recommendations.)

As the participants went through theprocess of struggling with the problems anddeveloping a plan that could produce realchange, the energy level in the roomincreased. Each group prioritized their rec-ommendations before reporting them to theentire group.

At the conclusion of the summit, thegroups had produced recommendations thatfocused on specific actions to achieve recon-ciliation, trust, justice, and leadership and ser-vice. The newsprint or flip charts in the roomwere filled with practical and timely recom-mendations that would move the communityto action. Some actions could begin immedi-ately, and others would require months if notyears of preparation and work. Yet each onepresented an opportunity or a challenge.


After the Summit

After the summit, the organizers listed theprioritized recommendations and mailed thelists to participants. Participants were asked torank each recommendation for importanceand feasibility on a Leikert scale from 1 to 5,with 5 being the most important or the mostfeasible and 1 being the least. Fifty-four rec-ommendations received a combined scorehigher than 3.5 and were listed in the finalreport and distributed to the summit partici-pants. Although each recommendation re-flects the priorities of the participants, there isa wide variety in content.

In December 2002, NCPC team mem-bers Darryl Jones and Jim Copple returned toSeattle to present the survey results to SheriffReichert, Rev. Rivers, and a subgroup ofabout 25 summit participants. The highestranked recommendation of the 54 summitrecommendations was a clear call to action:

Identify and establish strategies that help de-velop meaningful relationships between lawenforcement officers and indigenous commu-nity leaders and community-based organiza-tions prior to the onset of a crisis.

In response to this recommendation,NCPC team member Monica Palacio facili-tated the creation of the Washington StateWorking Group, a multidisciplinary andmulticounty coalition tasked with leadingchange efforts. The Working Group wouldconvene monthly between May and October2003 to achieve the following outcomes:

� Review the recommendations of the sum-mit and prioritize and manage work itemsthroughout the implementation process

� Mobilize other leaders, constituency groups,institutional support, and financial resourcesfrom all sectors

� Emerge as a model team of leaders who,with ongoing training and supports, woulddeliver institutional change.

Members of the Working Group wouldundertake the task of assessing how to decon-struct the historical injustices, racial bias, andcommunity distrust that were underminingcollective leadership and progress.

The Working Group held its first meet-ing on May 2, 2003, at SeaTac City Hall.Faith-based leaders, chiefs of police, longtimecommunity activists, leaders in the businesscommunity, and many others engaged in aseries of team-building activities based onmodels developed by the National CoalitionBuilding Institute. The activities were de-signed to challenge participants to become acommunity of leaders and a force for institu-tional change. Through these team-buildingactivities, group dynamics were transformed,and this multicultural group agreed that thequality of their work together would be adirect function of the quality of their rela-tionships in this coalition-based effort.

During the following months, the Work-ing Group met in King County as well asEverett and Spokane counties. About 35 lead-ers representing these and other countiesbegan working together and reporting onprogress in their areas. The following changestook place:

� The City of Lakewood established theLakewood African American Police Advi-sory Committee (LAAPAC).

� The King County Sheriff’s Office ex-panded recruitment efforts through a newinitiative, “Hiring in the Spirit of Service,”with input from and involvement by var-ious members of the Working Group.

� The Apostolic Clergy Advisory Councilidentified business and faith-based leadersand mobilized them for ongoing participa-tion in the Working Group.

� The Spokane County Sheriff’s Office con-vened a one-day meeting of NAACP leaders,Sikh community elders, and law enforce-


ment representatives to discuss systemiccross-cultural issues in their communities.

Working Group members continuedtheir work through committees tasked to doc-ument current policies, practices, and normswithin Washington State and to produceaction plans for carrying out stated goals. Thepolice recruitment and hiring committee gen-erated 34 recommendations, which are cur-rently being shared throughout the state.

Although significant progress is beingmade, it is essential that the summitparticipants—and those who have becomeinvolved since the summit—remain commit-ted to the effort. They must continue to seethemselves as bridges between the mistrustand fear of the past and the reconciliation andhope for the future. As Reichert, Rivers, andmany other leaders said at the summit, thework of reconciliation is just beginning.

Endnotes

1. Marc Mauer and Meda Chesney-Lind, “Intro-duction,” in Mauer and Chesney-Lind (eds.),Invisible Punishment: The Collateral Conse-quences of Mass Imprisonment (New York: TheNew Press, 2002), 3.

2. Cornel West, Race Matters (New York: VintageBooks, 1994), vii.

3. Raymond Paternoster et al., “An EmpiricalAnalysis of Maryland’s Death Sentencing Sys-tem With Respect to the Influence of Race andLegal Jurisdiction: Final Report,” January2003, University of Maryland, at www.urhome.umd.edu/newsdesk/pdf/finalrep.pdf.

4. West, Race Matters, 11–13. 5. Florangela Davila, “‘Cops and Culture’ Event

Aims for Trust,” Seattle Times, November 14,2002.

6. Joe Hall and Sue Hammond, “What Is Appre-ciative Inquiry?” Inner Edge Newsletter at www.thinbook.com/chap11fromle.html, 2.

7. Ibid., 2.8. Ibid., 2–3.9. Florangela Davila, “Hate-crime Response Crit-

icized,” Seattle Times, November 14, 2002,reporting on Human Rights Watch Report,“‘We Are Not the Enemy’: Hate CrimesAgainst Arabs, Muslims, and Those Perceivedto be Arab or Muslim after September 11,”November 2002, at www.hrw.org/reports/2002/usahate/.

10. “A study circle is a group of 8 to 12 people fromdifferent backgrounds and viewpoints whomeet several times to talk about an issue. In astudy circle, everyone has an equal voice, andpeople try to understand each other’s views.They do not have to agree. . . . The idea is toshare concerns and look for ways to make thingsbetter. A facilitator helps the group focus….”Study Circles Resource Center at www.study-circles.org/pages/what.html.


A P P E N D I X A

Summit Recommendations

Summit participants agreed on 54 recommendations.

Reconciliation

1. Acknowledge the need for reconciliation and for vehicles that promote trust.2. Adopt agency policies that commit personnel and resources to ongoing cross-cultural train-

ing (e.g., study circles).10

3. Review, revise, and re-create a grievance procedure. Provide strict monitoring of theprocedure.

4. Incorporate cultural competency training in monthly advisory council meetings, semi-annual Citizens’ Police Academy instruction, and Police Academy instruction. Providecontinuing education training for law enforcement that focuses on community outreach.

5. Establish a Community Policing Review Board comprising community advisory boardmembers and law enforcement representatives.

6. Create monthly diversity forums (co-facilitated by community liaisons and law enforce-ment) that address specific issues identified by community needs assessment (see rec-ommendation 8 below); provide information on existing community programs/strategies(e.g., Camp Connections).

7. Use the media to increase public awareness of local Citizens’ Police Academies andincreased opportunity for participation.

8. Conduct community needs assessments focusing on cultural understanding, and providefeedback for monthly diversity forums (see recommendation 6).

9. Develop performance measures and incorporate a feedback structure that will direct theimplementation of ideas and strategies developed at community meetings, forums, andadvisory councils convened to address the issue of reconciliation.

10. Increase connection to community advisory councils by creating a strategic vision thatincorporates the shared values of the community, mentoring programs for families of peo-ple in prison or at risk of going to prison, increased support for reentry initiatives, and pos-itive values related to working with law enforcement.

11. Establish community liaisons comprising faith leaders and community leaders who areresponsible for communicating with advisory boards, building the bridge between law

15

enforcement and community, and developing a professional and proactive plan for com-municating with the public during crisis situations.

12. Develop a media strategy to promote positive progress of multicultural understanding.13. Communicate internal and external law enforcement policy changes to the community.14. Increase the recruitment, hiring, and retention of bicultural and bilingual law enforcement

officers in underrepresented communities.15. Convene, at the request of police chiefs, those officers who are trained in and committed

to the principles of Community Oriented Policing, and use them to promote and advocatethe benefits of multicultural understanding.

16. Identify and establish strategies that help develop meaningful relationships between lawenforcement officers and indigenous community leaders and community-based organiza-tions prior to the onset of a crisis.

17. Create an effective communications mechanism to facilitate the dissemination of informa-tion by community leaders to the community at large.

18. Create and/or increase support for community coalitions that reflect the community’sethnic and religious composition.

Trust

19. Create a task force to establish success indicators and to measure the progress of strategiesto increase trust in the relationship between law enforcement and the community.

20. Through partnerships with the media and clergy, conduct recognition events, at least quar-terly, to promote positive news and to recognize individuals who have contributed toincreased cultural understanding.

21. Use faith-based and nonprofit organizations to promote open and honest communicationbetween law enforcement and the community (e.g., facilitated study circles).

22. Establish a mutual commitment among summit and community stakeholders to supportimplementation of summit recommendations by ensuring that the right people are at thetable, that they are representative of the communities’ diverse composition, and that theyshare the responsibility and power as decision makers.

23. To facilitate open communication, examine how easy it is for local community leaders togain access to law enforcement leaders.

24. Build and support partnerships between law enforcement and youth through mentoringprograms (e.g., Police Athletic Leagues).

25. Convene community-level summits with law enforcement, schools, the faith community,businesses, and youth to encourage dialog on important issues.

26. To increase the sense of community, create and disseminate a public calendar that adver-tises learning opportunities provided or sponsored by law enforcement.

Justice

27. Create and fund incentives for officers to learn new languages.28. Mandate that Community Action Councils be funded through the City Council, which

will provide access to additional funding resources and act as an intermediary for commu-nity agencies.


29. Implement policing strategies that support and promote increased personal contact withthe community.

30. Use asset forfeitures and seizures to provide increased support and funding/resources to ex-offender outreach and reentry programs in order to facilitate transition back into thecommunity.

31. Incorporate effective, science-based prevention programs that provide youth with safe andhealthy alternatives and that build resiliency.

32. To help law enforcement address major issues within the community, establish a standardof accountability that will enable the community to provide feedback regarding lawenforcement policies and procedures.

33. Solicit various media outlets to support media strategies and promote the positive accom-plishments resulting from community planning and partnerships.

34. Guarantee universal access to competent legal representation.35. Assess the enforcement of criminal justice codes across ethnic, economic, and religious

boundaries to ensure that they are applied fairly to all citizens.36. Create community boards to assess and analyze disproportionate sentencing.37. For community members who are interested in law enforcement careers, provide pre-

employment training designed to increase the number of eligible applicants.38. Establish Community Action Councils to address human rights and justice issues, and

establish links to national organizations such as NAACP and the National Council of LaRaza.

39. Mandate action plans from Community Action Council meetings as a condition of receiv-ing funding.

40. Increase community awareness of existing avenues to access law enforcement (e.g., com-munity forums).

41. Promote neighborhood revitalization projects designed to reduce crime, provide access to eco-nomic development reparations, and increase residents’ connectedness to the community.

Leadership and Service

42. Create a strategic outreach plan to develop and/or improve communication, and enlist sup-port from national organizations established to protect the civil rights of ethnic minoritiessuch as NAACP, the National Council of La Raza, and the National Urban League.

43. As part of the outreach plan, include participants from civil rights organizations in a reviewboard that is responsible for monitoring the implementation of summit recommendations.

44. Incorporate community service and service-learning components into Police Academytraining.

45. Provide information on community resources at kiosks in grocery stores and at bus stops.46. Establish a position within law enforcement agencies to monitor the performance evalua-

tions of law officers and ensure completion of strategies designed to address the recom-mendations that result from the evaluations.

47. Establish communication at multiple levels within law enforcement and community agen-cies to continue consistent, proactive, and positive outreach to the community.


48. Provide leadership development training classes or workshops for law enforcement officersand community agencies; the training should focus on relationship building, effective andculturally competent communication, and personal and professional accountability.

49. Encourage law enforcement leaders to get out of the office and into the community toincrease relationships between law enforcement and the community.

50. Share leadership development resources across the community to prevent duplication ofefforts.

51. Develop an active citizen initiative within each community to promote a sense of individ-ual responsibility for the common good.

52. Increase participation in public safety programs that seek collaboration between thecommunity and law enforcement.

53. Hire an outside consultant to conduct an annual performance evaluation and establish aformal training process to address assessment recommendations.

54. Encourage the development of relationships with people in different spheres of influence,and acknowledge both formal and informal community leaders.


A P P E N D I X B

Washington State Summit on Law Enforcement and Culture Awareness

Agenda

Day One: November 13, 2002

8:00 a.m.–9:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast and Registration

9:00 a.m.–9:15 a.m. Native American Ceremonial OpeningAllan Olney, Yakima Indian Nation

9:15 a.m.–9:45 a.m. Welcome and IntroductionsJames E. Copple, Vice President, Public Policy and ProgramDevelopment, National Crime Prevention Council

Ron Sims, King County Executive

Special Introduction of Keynote SpeakerJorge Madrazo, Consul of Mexico

9:45 a.m.–10:30 a.m. Keynote AddressReverend Lewis Anthony, Metropolitan Wesley African MethodistEpiscopal Zion Church, Washington, DC

10:30 a.m.–10:45 a.m. BREAK

10:45 a.m.–11:00 a.m. Explanation of Summit ProcessJames E. Copple, Vice President, Public Policy and ProgramDevelopment, National Crime Prevention Council

Darryl A. Jones Sr., Vice President, Coalition and Law EnforcementTraining Services, National Crime Prevention Council

Monica Palacio, Director, Weed and Seed Initiatives, NationalCrime Prevention Council

19

11:00 a.m.–11:20 a.m. Community Reconciliation KeynoteThis keynote will focus on Principles and Experiences ofCommunity Reconciliation that can promote cross-culturalawareness and understanding.

Michael Walker, Partnership for a Safer Cleveland

11:20 a.m.–12:45 p.m. Small Group ProcessThe small group process will consist of 10 to 15 summitparticipants and will be facilitated by an outside facilitator to help identify elements that are working “right” in ourcommunities and to identify strategies and solutions for moving forward on the theme of Community Reconciliation.

12:45 p.m.–2:00 p.m. LUNCH (Interactive Lunch: Integrating Law Enforcement with Cultural Groups)

Lunch Keynote: “How We Sustain Ourselves When Living and Working Out of Our Comfort Zone”

John A. Calhoun, President and CEO, National Crime Prevention Council

2:00 p.m.–2:20 p.m. Community Trust KeynoteThis keynote will focus on Principles and Experiences ofCommunity Trust that can promote cross-cultural awareness and understanding.

Reverend Warren Dolphus, National Association of Blacks inCriminal Justice

2:20 p.m.–3:45 p.m. Small Group ProcessThe small group process will consist of 10 to 15 summitparticipants and will be facilitated by an outside facilitator to help identify elements that are working “right” in ourcommunities and to identify strategies and solutions for moving forward on the theme of Community Trust.

3:45 p.m.–4:00 p.m. BREAK

4:00 p.m.–4:45 p.m. Report Outs on Small Group Process for CommunityReconciliation and Trust

4:45 p.m.–5:00 p.m. Wrap-up and Adjournment


Day Two: November 14, 2002

8:00 a.m.–9:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast

9:00 a.m.–9:15 a.m. Review of Day One Outcomes

9:15 a.m.–9:35 a.m. Community Justice KeynoteThis keynote will focus on Principles and Experiences ofCommunity Justice that can promote cross-cultural awareness and understanding.

Monica Palacio, Director, Weed and Seed Initiatives, NationalCrime Prevention Council

9:35 a.m.–11:00 a.m. Small Group ProcessThe small group process will consist of 10 to 15 summitparticipants and will be facilitated by an outside facilitator to help identify elements that are working “right” in ourcommunities and to identify strategies and solutions for moving forward on the theme of Community Justice.

11:00 a.m.–11:15 a.m. BREAK

11:15 a.m.–11:30 a.m. Building a Community of Practice Network To Promote Goal Implementation

11:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m. “Micro-story” Reports From Small GroupsEach group will identify one “micro-story” to be shared with the entire conference.

12:30 p.m.–1:40 p.m. LUNCH

1:40 p.m.–2:00 p.m. Leadership and Service KeynoteThis keynote will focus on Principles and Experiences ofLeadership and Service that can promote cross-cultural awareness and understanding.

Alfred Ramirez, President, National Community for Latino Leadership

2:00 p.m.–3:25 p.m. Small Group ProcessThe small group process will consist of 10 to 15 summitparticipants and will be facilitated by an outside facilitator to help identify elements that are working “right” in ourcommunities and to identify strategies and solutions for moving forward on the theme of Leadership and Service.


3:25 p.m.–3:35 p.m. BREAK

3:35 p.m.–4:20 p.m. Report Outs on Small Group Process for Community Justiceand Leadership and Service

4:20 p.m.–4:45 p.m. Discussion of Day Two Outcomes

4:45 p.m.–5:00 p.m. Next Steps, Evaluation, Wrap-up, and AdjournmentReverend Donovan L. Rivers, Apostolic Clergy Advisory Council

Sheriff Dave Reichert, King County

James E. Copple, Vice President, Public Policy and ProgramDevelopment, National Crime Prevention Council


National Crime Prevention Council 1000 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 13th FloorWashington, DC 20036-5325

202-466-6272Fax 202-296-1356

www.ncpc.org ISBN 1-929888-32-5

Documents

Law Enforcement, Race, and Reconciliation