[0:11] >> good morning, everyone. Thank you all for being here
[0:18] today. I would like to call to order
[0:21] this public hearing of the committee on the judiciary and
[0:24] public safety. I'm councilmember brooke pinto,
[0:27] representing ward 2, and the chairwoman of the committee.
[0:31] the time is 10:08 a.m. On wednesday, february 20 fifth.
[0:34] we are conducting this hearing in person today in room 123 of
[0:39] the john a. Wilson building. And virtually via zoom,
[0:41] streaming on the dc council website and youtube and x.
[0:47] the committee on the judiciary and public safety has oversight
[0:50] responsibility for matters affecting the judiciary and
[0:54] legal systems, criminal law, procedure, justice, juvenile
[0:58] justice, public safety, policing, violence prevention
[1:02] and intervention, access to justice, family law, probate,
[1:07] fire, emergency medical services, 911, three woman,
[1:12] homeland, forensic science, fatality review, medical
[1:15] examination, victim services, child support, and issues
[1:19] related to women. Today, we are conducting the
[1:23] performance oversights for three agencies, all of which are
[1:27] critical to our public safety ecosystem.
[1:30] first, the criminal justice coordinating council, the office
[1:32] of police complaints, and the metropolitan police department.
[1:35] we will first hear from the criminal justice coordinating
[1:39] council, or cjcc. They serve as a forum for
[1:45] identifying challenges and generating solutions to enhance
[1:47] public safety and the fair administration of justice for
[1:52] residents, visitors, and justice involved individuals.
[1:59] they conduct research and analysis and provide training
[2:02] and technical assistance on behalf of its district and
[2:05] federal member agencies. Cjcc's work is particularly
[2:09] critical as the district increasingly relies on
[2:13] systemwide data, interagency coronation, and evidence driven
[2:16] analysis to inform our public safety strategies.
[2:19] I am especially looking forward to discussing cjcc's data
[2:25] modernization work, its role supporting coordination across
[2:28] agencies, and reports and analyses cjcc produces to guide
[2:32] public safety policies and practices.
[2:34] these initiatives sit at the intersection of data, policy,
[2:38] and operational practice and are essential to ensuring that
[2:41] agencies and the council have reliable, timely, and usable
[2:46] information that guide decision-making.
[2:48] it will also be important today to get an update on where things
[2:51] stand with many of the requirements laid out for data
[2:55] sharing so that we can have access to the best information
[2:59] to guide our policies moving forward.
[3:02] many people don't know about cjcc, so I want to reiterate
[3:07] again how crucial this agency is in getting together all of the
[3:12] principles in our public safety ecosystem from both our local
[3:15] and federal system. As we know in d.c., we have a
[3:19] unique public safety system, so having cjcc be fully staffed,
[3:23] fully funded, and help serve as an arbiter between all of those
[3:27] agencies on information collection and driving toward
[3:32] solutions is really, really critical, and an agency that we
[3:37] need to support this year and support their funding for this
[3:41] data management. Our next agency in today's
[3:44] oversight hearing is the office of police complaints, or opc.
[3:49] opc was created to offer an independent system of review of
[3:53] citizens complaints against police officers in the district
[3:55] of columbia. The office investigates,
[3:59] mediates, and adjudicates complaints against officers, as
[4:01] well as ledisi housing authority police department.
[4:06] opc makes policy recommendations to the council, the mayor, and
[4:08] mpd and d c hpd to ensure officers are employing the best
[4:13] practices to enhance public safety and promote trust with
[4:15] the communities they serve. Today, I am looking forward to
[4:19] hearing from director cross about his past fiscal year's
[4:22] complaint trends, as well as reports and policy
[4:26] recommendations. I know that complaints are up
[4:28] significantly since this time last year, so I am eager to hear
[4:32] about trends in those complaints and how the agency is handling
[4:35] the larger caseloads. I am also interested
[4:38] in discussing more about staffing needs in the agency,
[4:41] especially given the increase in complaints.
[4:44] we know a trusted police department brings legitimacy to
[4:46] the department and all of our communities and ensures mpd is
[4:51] working on behalf of all of our residents every day.
[4:54] I look forward to the discussion with opc on how we can strive to
[4:58] do better and take the aggregate of their complaints.
[5:06] finally, we will hear from the metropolitan police department.
[5:11] mpd is the primary law enforcement agency in the
[5:13] district and provides crime prevention and investigation
[5:16] strategies services as well as emergency response services.
[5:19] mpd continues to play a critical role in promoting public safety
[5:22] in d.c. And we want to thank them for their huge efforts and
[5:27] success in driving down crime over the last several years.
[5:31] we have seen significant progress in overall reduction of
[5:33] crime in the district, including significant decreases in violent
[5:37] crime. 22 to five saw a 53% reduction
[5:40] in violent crime when compared to 2020 three.
[5:45] this past year alone saw an overall 29% decrease in violent
[5:49] crime, including a notable 32 percent decrease in homicide and
[5:53] 37% decrease in robberies. This year's statistics are
[5:59] showing some roller trends already and I know the
[6:02] department and its officers work hard every day to ensure crime
[6:06] continues to go down so we can fulfill our basic responsibility
[6:11] as a government manager everyone can feel safe.
[6:19] there has been an unprecedented level of federal interference
[6:23] with our local law enforcement and in our city.
[6:25] for the first time in history, the president invoked section
[6:29] 740 of the home rule act on august 11 that declared a public
[6:36] emergency and authorized the president to call on mpd for
[6:38] services for a period of 30 days.
[6:42] the federal emergency ended on september 9, but law enforcement
[6:48] has not looked the same in washington, d.c. Since before
[6:51] the emergency. Given mpd's unique role as the
[6:54] police department in d.c., and we know we are the nation's
[6:59] capital, our police force has always had increased interaction
[7:04] with federal law enforcement agencies who also operate here.
[7:08] additionally, in coordination with federal and local law
[7:12] enforcement, it is sometimes important.
[7:15] however, there are many concerns that have arisen out of the
[7:18] surge of federal law enforcement and engraved -- immigration
[7:22] enforcement activity in the district in the last six months.
[7:25] I have previously spoken to many of these concerns, including the
[7:29] unacceptable federal policy of having masked agents take people
[7:33] from our streets, federal hsi officers shooting at individuals
[7:37] during traffic stops, and my shared opposition with my
[7:42] council colleagues and the mayor to having federal agencies
[7:47] conducting immigration enforcement patrolling in our
[7:49] streets with our local police. One of the most fundamental
[7:53] needs we have to create safety in our communities is to have
[7:56] trust between our residents and law enforcement.
[8:00] we prevent and stop crimes when witnesses feel safe to call 911,
[8:04] and we solve crimes and prevent future crimes when witnesses
[8:08] feel comfortable coming forward and engaging with law
[8:11] enforcement and prosecutors. Today the last six months in our
[8:18] oversight. We asked mpd a series of
[8:21] questions. We held a public hearing in
[8:23] december where we heard from over 100 public witnesses.
[8:26] that hearing was over 12 hours long.
[8:29] and we got a lot of ideas from that hearing, so I want to thank
[8:32] many of you for being here today to share your perspective and
[8:36] ideas. That is how we can drive forward
[8:40] with improvements. I then sent a letter signed by
[8:43] all my council colleagues with a series of questions, much about
[8:48] the federal coordination, which federal agencies are here, how
[8:50] they are being deployed, and the answers we got were frankly
[8:55] unsatisfactory and did not provide clarity.
[8:59] we then sent follow-up questions through our performance
[9:03] oversight. We got responses again that when
[9:08] it came to federal agencies, we did not get the answers we
[9:12] needed. Yesterday, I introduced a bill
[9:14] that does a couple of things. It first says if there is a
[9:20] serious use of force by a federal agent and our mpd
[9:24] officers are there with their body worn camera footage, that
[9:27] body worn camera footage must be released to the public within
[9:31] five days. Second, it requires a public
[9:34] database of any serious use of force cases with federal agents
[9:37] that have happened in the last year.
[9:40] third, it requires mpd to maintain information on a
[9:44] roll calls, which agents are coming to the roll calls and
[9:46] where they are being deployed. These are commonsense
[9:51] transparency measures to understand the state of affairs
[9:54] in our city and make sure the public has insight into what is
[9:57] happening on our shared streets. Sure.
[10:03] thank you. To be clear, I strongly support
[10:12] -- much better? Ok.
[10:15] sorry. I guess I won't start over given
[10:19] we have a lot of witnesses. I strongly support our local
[10:24] police enforcement officers doing the work of public safety
[10:27] for our local city. The work of mpd that they do
[10:31] every day is vital to ensuring public safetyin d.c.
[10:37] officers put their lives on the line to keep all of us safe, and
[10:39] I want to talk today also with the chief about what has been
[10:43] leading to the lower crime rates we have seen, what initiatives
[10:47] mpd is doing to build trust within the community, and
[10:50] specifically what they are doing to build trust and positive
[10:53] interactions with our young people.
[10:55] I also want to thank the public witnesses who are here today.
[10:58] I know you all our -- you all are busy.
[11:06] it is fundamentally important to our process.
[11:14] I do see we have been joined by my at large colleague
[11:18] councilmember donnie crawford. I want to turn to you for your
[11:21] opening statements. >> thank you, chairperson pinto.
[11:27] good morning. I am at large councilmember
[11:30] crawford and I want to thank the public and government witnesses
[11:33] who are here today to testify, enter the perspectives and
[11:38] experiences. I also want to thank chairwoman
[11:40] pinto for convening today's oversight hearing and the
[11:44] committee staff for their hard work in preparing for today.
[11:46] public safety is foundational to the vitality of our city,
[11:52] shaping whether families feel comfortable walking in their
[11:55] neighborhoods, whether small businesses can thrive, whether
[11:58] young people feel supported rather than surveilled, and
[12:00] whether residents trust that the system works fairly for them.
[12:04] public safety must mean safety for everyone.
[12:08] including our immigrant families, black and brown
[12:11] communities, and longtime district residents who have not
[12:15] always experienced policing in the same way.
[12:18] a public safety strategy leave some communities fearful or
[12:21] uncertain is not serving our community.
[12:24] in my conversations with district residents over the past
[12:27] month, I have heard concerns and sensed the unease many residents
[12:32] feel about transparency, youth interactions, accountability,
[12:36] and the nature of mpd's collaboration with federal law
[12:40] enforcement partners. Today's hearing gives us the
[12:43] opportunity to ensure our public safety strategies are not only
[12:46] effective but transparent, consistent, and aligned with
[12:49] district law and values. My goal is to better understand
[12:54] where progress has been made, where gaps remain, and how we
[12:57] can ensure public safety strategies both reduce crime and
[13:01] strengthen trust with the communities mpd serves.
[13:03] I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and I thank
[13:06] everyone again for being here today.
[13:07] >> thank you so much, councilmember crawford.
[13:12] I also want to note that councilmember crawford is now
[13:16] member of the judiciary committee, so we welcome you.
[13:20] ok, so, as always for today's hearing, we will hear from our
[13:25] public witnesses and the government witnesses, one agency
[13:29] at a time. We will first start with cjcc.
[13:32] for public witnesses, then for government witness, then opc and
[13:39] mpd. All public witnesses have three
[13:42] minutes to present your testimony today.
[13:43] I am going to ask you all, those who have testament -- testified
[13:48] with me before know that I feel bad cutting people off but we
[13:50] really want to make sure we hear from everybody, and I know
[13:54] everyone has different things and child care and issues they
[13:57] need to get to, so I ask for all of your help to keep yourself on
[14:00] track with three minutes. But you will hear the beep and
[14:02] we have to keep moving after that.
[14:05] I am going to invite or first panel of public cjcc witnesses
[14:09] for cjcc jawanna hardy, tracy velazquez, natalia otero, l.
[14:15] english. Online, tia bell and kylie
[14:19] hogan. L. English, are you here?
[14:31] ok. Is jawanna hardy here?
[14:37] ok. Welcome to you all.
[14:41] we can begin with tracy velazquez, policies director for
[14:44] the council for court excellence.
[14:51] >> thank you, chairperson pinto, members of the committee for the
[14:57] opportunity to testify. My name is tracy velazquez and I
[15:01] am the policy director for the council of court excellence.
[15:02] cjcc plays a critical role, as you said, and coordinating
[15:08] agency collaboration and data sharing and public reporting
[15:12] across d.c.'s justice agencies. I want to briefly highlight a
[15:15] few areas which are provided greater detail on in my written
[15:19] testimony. First, we commend cjcc for their
[15:23] statistical analysis tool which improves transparency by
[15:26] providing public dashboards odd crime, arrest, incarceration,
[15:30] supervision, and other topics. However, the functionality to
[15:33] download data limits its usefulness.
[15:37] even simple analyses require manual data transfer, which is
[15:39] inefficient and prone to error. If the current platform cannot
[15:43] support downloads, we hope cjcc will consider posting excel
[15:47] spreadsheets as many other jurisdictions do.
[15:49] next, cjcc provides strong reports and programs on issues
[15:55] of relevance and importance, including a report on youth and
[15:59] family perspectives on juvenile violence, and a panel of
[16:03] successful violence reduction efforts from around the country.
[16:05] I attended that excellent panel and would urge both the dc
[16:09] council and agencies decision-makers to inform these
[16:13] informative -- attend these informative events.
[16:16] we were disappointed the victimization survey mandated in
[16:19] 2023 has not moved forward.
[16:23] this survey would provide more detailed data directly from
[16:26] crime victims without a law enforcement filter, and I would
[16:29] note it would include potentially victimization that
[16:33] is not reported to law enforcement to give people an
[16:36] understanding of whether there are issues around trust in law
[16:40] enforcement when there's victimization.
[16:41] we urge cjcc to begin planning the survey with existing
[16:46] resources and ask the council to appropriate dedicated funding
[16:48] for fiscal year 2027. We are also concerned that
[16:52] non-cjcc reports addressing issues of significant public
[16:57] interest have not been publicly released.
[16:59] for example, understanding why people are in the jail for over
[17:03] five years is particularly relevant, given that five years
[17:06] in jail costs the district half a million dollars.
[17:10] we ask them to make this work available to the public.
[17:13] finally, we appreciate cjcc's leadership on two interagency
[17:17] initiatives. Both of which move forward our
[17:24] recommendations from the past. Cce has been attending the
[17:31] meetings. We encourage expansion of
[17:35] nonpolice options, including peer support specialist,
[17:39] development of juvenile prearrest diversion, and
[17:41] additional police training. Thank you for your time and
[17:43] consideration, and happy to expand on any of these.
[17:45] >> thank you very much. Natalia otero, executive
[17:50] director and cofounder of d.c. Safe.
[17:51] >> thank you. My name is natalia otero and I'm
[17:56] here on behalf of d.c. Safe. I came today to discuss the
[18:01] important undertaking -- sorry. >> pull it closer.
[18:07] >> sorry. Is this better?
[18:10] I came today to discuss the important undertaking that the
[18:14] cjcc has accepted in convening a domestic violence task force.
[18:17] dv is complex and has a ripple effect that impacts a whole
[18:21] person, and there must be a recognition that a response
[18:24] across the public safety cluster , the supportive services
[18:27] cluster, and the public sector for this to be successful.
[18:30] we have been pleased to see a greater focus and a more active
[18:34] involvement from the public safety cluster in domestic
[18:38] violence and offender accountability in 2025.
[18:39] we have seen the positive impact that a focused attention of the
[18:43] city can make to drive down community violence.
[18:45] that said, we want to point out we have an outsized role, and in
[18:53] the network of victim service housing providers that impact
[18:57] both survivors and offenders. The criminal justice system no
[19:00] doubt has a vital role in offender accountability, but we
[19:03] know the system cannot stand alone.
[19:06] d.c. Safe will have served the district for 20 years in
[19:09] october. We have approximately 100,000
[19:11] clients in our database with a plethora of good data attached.
[19:15] we also know that on average are high-risk clients are already
[19:19] involved with five city agencies when we meet them.
[19:21] the consequences of the lack of a systemic approach is evident.
[19:26] in our testimony for the deputy mayor for public safety and
[19:30] justice, we drew attention to a 2025 db homicide that occurred
[19:33] within a week after a suspect was arrested and charged with a
[19:36] dv offense, which also unfortunately ended in a police
[19:41] shooting at another death. In 2026, we have already seen
[19:45] two intimate partner violence homicides.
[19:48] in one, the offender was under supervision for not one but two
[19:52] db offenses at the time of the murder.
[19:54] one for homicide of the victim and one for another domestic
[19:58] violence survivor. Further, one dv homicide
[20:00] resulted in the shooting of a child, a missing child, and one
[20:04] child who saw her mother died in front of their eyes.
[20:08] further, that suspect took his own life.
[20:10] those of the worst possible outcomes in a city that prides
[20:13] itself on hard work to address community violence.
[20:16] in the first decade we implemented our lethality
[20:20] assessment program, we only lost three clients to homicide.
[20:24] we know this approach can work, but we also know that no one
[20:28] agency can move the needle alone.
[20:29] our city has bright minds working across the district in
[20:32] many areas. When the right people are
[20:34] focused on a problem, I have every faith it can be innovated.
[20:38] we don't expect we will ever be completely free of the worst
[20:41] possible outcomes, but we can do better.
[20:44] the working group is a first step toward stronger
[20:47] coordination across the criminal justice system, but -- I'm
[20:51] sorry. There are many other areas where
[20:55] adding to supplementing and appropriately resourcing
[20:57] existing efforts can go a long way in creating substantive
[21:00] change. Thank you very much.
[21:01] >> great, thank you. Kylie hogan, director of
[21:10] victim's advocacy, d.c. Safe. >> thank you.
[21:15] my name is kylie hogan. I am the director of systems
[21:18] advocacy at d.c. Safe. We serve roughly 12,000
[21:22] residents a year through our unique coordinated crisis
[21:26] response model. Our services aimed to provide
[21:29] survivors with lifesaving safety planning information, advocacy,
[21:32] and resources, but also create essential doorways for our
[21:35] partners throughout the community to connect
[21:39] survivors with safety. The scopes of our partnerships
[21:42] are extensive, including many members of the criminal justice
[21:46] coordinating council, and we look to those partners not just
[21:49] to connect survivors to critical domestic violence services, but
[21:52] also to uplift and expedite the needs of survivors at the
[21:57] highest risk of re-assault. This is our first year
[22:01] testifying related to the cjcc , but we want to express our
[22:06] wholehearted approval that they will combat domestic violence in
[22:09] their new working group. D.c. Safe and advocates
[22:12] throughout the city are at their heart's creators of systems
[22:15] change and we cannot take the awesome responsibility we have
[22:19] of working with survivors of domestic violence in their
[22:21] journey to safety without recognizing and attempting to
[22:26] address we believe this is a much needed
[22:28] opportunity to consider how the city approaches domestic
[22:32] violence. We were pleased to be approached
[22:33] at the formation of this group to discuss what we were seeing
[22:36] every day on the groundworking with survivors.
[22:39] we shared vital information from our almost 20 years of service
[22:41] but also our experience with partners, including
[22:44] recommendations from the domestic violence system review
[22:48] and the working group and information learned from our
[22:51] domestic violence learned pilot with m.p.d. And more.
[22:54] information on these recommendations or pilots were
[22:57] previously shared with the committee in written testimony
[22:59] for the deputy mayor of public safety and justice.
[23:02] we're happy to share expertise and experience and hope the
[23:05] working group continues to recognize the critical role of
[23:08] community organizations and the network of agencies throughout
[23:11] the district that regularly interact with survivors.
[23:15] we want to particularly uplift the need for a more
[23:18] comprehensive focus on the most pervasive offenders.
[23:22] we've reached out to the past to the jccc with multiple partners
[23:28] throughout their lifetime and shared our thoughts on the
[23:30] district's current approach to defender accountability.
[23:34] while we updifferent the survivors and testimony across
[23:38] district agencies, we want to highlight here this is only one
[23:40] side of the coin and without an innovative approach to offender
[23:46] accountability and building resources and support for
[23:48] rehabilitation, we'll never consider our job complete.
[23:51] lastly, we want to uplift the need for sustainable change.
[23:55] in a meeting with cjcc and exploring the background for the
[24:00] working group beyond recommendation, we looked at the
[24:03] biggest deficit they face is a deficit in trust.
[24:05] all too much we hear survivors say why should they call police
[24:10] or file an order or move forward with charges because nothing
[24:13] will happen anyway. We do our best to advocate in
[24:15] those cases but a loss of faith in the criminal justice system
[24:18] is pervasive and difficult to shake.
[24:21] survivor collaboration is often essential to making criminal
[24:25] justice processes move forward and faith must be restored.
[24:28] as a group we take a look at the response over the next year, we
[24:32] know survivors and advocates will be watching and hope to see
[24:36] success. Thank you for the opportunity to
[24:39] testify and I look forward to any questions.
[24:43] chairman pinto: ok. Thank you, kiley.
[24:50] irene jacobs. You need to accept the
[24:53] invitation for join as a panelist and want to triple
[24:56] check we don't have jawanna hardy or l. English here?
[25:05] all right. Irene jacobs.
[25:10] ok. Well, thank you all very much.
[25:12] that concludes our public testimony.
[25:13] thank you for being here. Ok.
[25:17] I'm now going to call -- oh, just in the nick of time.
[25:22] irene jacobs, policy manager, black swan academy.
[25:26] please go ahead. Irene: good morning, council
[25:32] members, I'm irene jacobs of the black swan academy and the youth
[25:36] power and safety coalition. Over the past several years
[25:38] we've increased investment in enforcing and policing.
[25:42] at the same time, many youth programs, school supports, and
[25:44] community based services remain underfunded or unevenly
[25:48] distributed, particularly east of the river.
[25:50] when we continue to divest from these development and overinvest
[25:54] in punishment, we are responding to harm after it happens instead
[25:58] of preventing it in the first place.
[26:02] black swan academy cares deeply about our young people and we
[26:04] see their lived experience every day.
[26:06] we are here to ask that you all continue to support strategies
[26:11] that research shows really work to prevent violence and keep our
[26:15] communities safe. First, strong relationships save
[26:19] lives. Young people are safe we are
[26:21] they have trusted adults and positive peers, programs that
[26:24] match youth with trained mentor and teach conflict resolution
[26:27] skills have been proven to reduce fights and arrests.
[26:29] we are asking of the council invest in more mentoring and
[26:35] skill building and spaces where the youth can build healthy
[26:40] friendships. Basic needs matter for safety.
[26:41] when families struggle with housing, food, transportation or
[26:45] income, young people are feeling the stress of their families.
[26:48] we need to help families and young people meet their basic
[26:51] needs. Third, recreation is a violence
[26:54] prevention strategy. Research shows when youth have
[26:56] safe and fun places to go after school, such as rec centers,
[27:01] violence goes down. Most youth violence happens
[27:04] between 3:00 and 9:00 and know recreation gives young people a
[27:08] safe place to be. Fourth, services should meet
[27:10] youth where they are. Many young people don't have the
[27:13] resources to walk into a clinic on their own.
[27:17] placing counselors, social workers and violence interruptor
[27:20] teams in schools, libraries, and neighborhoods would make support
[27:25] easier. Finally, we must listen to youth
[27:27] and families. In an atmosphere full of curfew
[27:30] expansion and limited access to youth sports and current
[27:35] occupation in our city as well as laws aiming to make young
[27:39] people pay for crimes as adults, we have to recognize that our
[27:42] young people are being sent a very harmful message, that they
[27:46] are unworthy of trust, investment and belonging.
[27:49] in contrast, when we are able to enrich their lives and
[27:53] communities, we can build their confidence and self-esteem.
[27:57] we need to continue investing in quality programs, mentorship,
[28:02] creative arts and safe spaces for our young people.
[28:03] they are deserving of joy, growth, and belonging.
[28:06] young people know what is happening in their
[28:09] neighborhoods. They know what makes them feel
[28:11] safe. The city should support youth
[28:15] advisory councils, pay youth for their time and expertise and
[28:17] include families in real decisionmaking.
[28:19] safety is strongest when everyone has a voice.
[28:21] I urge the district to rebalance its approach by prioritizing
[28:27] youth development as a core violence prevention strategy and
[28:31] reducing reliance on punitive measures that do not address
[28:34] root causes. When we support our young people
[28:36] in these ways, we make our entire city safer.
[28:39] thank you for your time. Chairman pinto: thank you so
[28:44] much for your testimony. And as a reminder, I'll put in a
[28:49] little plug for folks to support and try to get across the finish
[28:54] line some bills waiting in the council, one of which is my bill
[28:57] to open up rec spaces on weekends, another to provide for
[29:05] custodian support for our open spaces so that more of our
[29:08] schools can open their spaces to kids and weekends.
[29:13] another serious of bills I introduced last year are all in
[29:17] other committees, one would create a teen center in every
[29:20] quadrant, another one creates an app to connect young people for
[29:24] paid job opportunities. I want to make sure that we all
[29:29] work together to support that advocacy for those other bills
[29:32] in other committees, recognizing how important it is to our
[29:36] broader public safety mission. Thank you for your testimony.
[29:39] and I thank all our public witnesses for your testimony.
[29:42] we are now going to turn to our government witness.
[29:51] director love. Check tim director of the
[29:56] coordinating council, christy love.
[29:59] director love, if you have folks joining from your team, if you
[30:02] could state your name and position for the record, please.
[30:05] we can start here. If you could put on your
[30:10] microphone. >> matthew bouchet, attorney
[30:14] adviser of the ccc. >> nelia taber, director of
[30:21] policy. >> director of research and
[30:24] policy, cjcc. Chairman pinto: wonderful.
[30:29] thank you. It's our tradition to swear in
[30:31] all government witnesses who appear before it.
[30:32] if I could ask you to keep your microphone on and raise your
[30:35] right hand. Do you swear or affirm under
[30:38] penalty of law the testimony you're about to provide before
[30:41] this committee and the council of the district of columbia is
[30:44] the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
[30:45] >> I do. >> I do.
[30:47] >> I do. Chairman pinto: director love,
[30:50] I'd like you to give any opening statement you may have.
[30:56] director love: good morning, chair member pinto and chair
[31:01] member crawford and those here today, I'm kristy love, criminal
[31:06] director of the coordinating council or the cjcc and joined
[31:10] by dr. Nelia taber, director research and policy and matthew
[31:16] bouchet who is our attorney adviser.
[31:19] I'm pleased to be before you today to provide a testimony of
[31:22] the performance of cjcc. It's an independent agency and
[31:26] serve as a forum for identifying challenges, generating solutions
[31:30] to enhance public safety and the fair administration of justice
[31:33] here in the district. Cjcc director of staff work with
[31:43] 19 members who direct federal agencies.
[31:48] the mayor serves as the chair and chair pro tempore of the
[31:54] cjcc and attorney general brian schwab was recently directed to
[31:57] serve as the federal independent co-chair of the cjcc.
[32:02] we organize our work across five priority areas.
[32:05] they include violent crime, juvenile justice substance abuse
[32:11] and mental health, incarceration and corrections, and automated
[32:15] information sharing. The cjcc members preferred to as
[32:21] principals, identify initiatives for each priority area that
[32:24] serve as focus for our committees for fy-25 and fy-26.
[32:28] today I'd like to highlight both the accomplishments of the
[32:31] committees as well as those of the cjcc staff in support of our
[32:36] partner agencies. With respect to violent crime,
[32:40] the focus of the gun stat work room has been twofold, to
[32:45] monitor the continued justice center involvement of
[32:48] individuals at high risk of engaging in gun violence and to
[32:52] develop a method for routinely updating the list of high risk
[32:57] individuals it. To accomplish the latter, cjcc
[33:00] staff reviewed the approach previously used by the national
[33:05] institute of criminal justice reform.
[33:06] we conducted a lit review, we attended a convening of subject
[33:11] matter experts and consulted the members of the gun stat work
[33:15] group and helped us identify methodology for identifying
[33:18] individuals at high risk of gun violence.
[33:21] the methodology exists of quantitative criminal history
[33:24] data as well as qualitative data from mpd, csosa which is our
[33:35] agency as well as violence interruptors and they identify
[33:38] key factors associated with persons engaged in gun violence.
[33:43] we expect to finalize the new gun stat list by the end of
[33:46] april. Also related to violent crime as
[33:49] was previously stated, the principals elected to establish
[33:52] a domestic violence work group. They will identify to addressing
[34:01] challenges related to prosecuting d.v. Cases and
[34:04] holding them accountable and protecting and giving voice to
[34:10] d.v. Victims and survivors. Juvenile justice, we have a
[34:14] juvenile justice committee that engages in four priority efforts
[34:19] during fy-2025. Undergo the key drivers of youth
[34:21] violence, identifying and addressing reasons for long
[34:24] lengths of stay for committed youth at the youth services
[34:28] center, establishing a continuum of care for at risk system
[34:31] involved youth and enhancing efforts to identify and support
[34:36] crossover youth. We engaged the contractor
[34:40] opportunity consulting to conduct focus groups of youth,
[34:42] parents, community members, and youth serving organizations to
[34:48] understand why youth engage in violent crime and what could
[34:51] deter them from doing so, appropriate mechanisms of
[34:55] accountability and prospectives of available services and
[34:59] supports. Opportunity consulting released
[35:01] a report in september of 2025 with findings and
[35:04] recommendations, one of which was to develop targeted
[35:07] prevention efforts for high risk youth and high risk
[35:11] neighborhoods. As a follow on to this report,
[35:14] we convened a session with representatives from coca, inc.
[35:21] and youth advocate programs or yap and they described their
[35:24] models for successfully engaging high risk youth and reducing
[35:28] their involvement in violent crime.
[35:30] developing a mechanism to both identify and support high risk
[35:34] youth is a priority for the juvenile justice committee for
[35:39] fy-26. The j.j.c. Explored several
[35:42] reasons why committed youth awaiting placement have had long
[35:45] lengths of stay at y.s.c. Many of these issues stem from
[35:49] the lack of a psychiatric residential treatment facility
[35:53] here in the district, with input from jyc members, our staff
[35:59] released a report earlier this month examining the financial
[36:03] and social cost of placing youth in out of state rptf's and hope
[36:09] it can be used as a resource for executive and council when
[36:13] deciding to build rotpf in the district.
[36:16] for continuum of care and crossover youth initiatives, we
[36:20] expect both of these projects to be completed by the end of the
[36:24] fiscal year. Cjcc convened its first meeting
[36:27] of the prearrested conversion task force which is responsible
[36:31] for making recommendations to council regarding eligibility
[36:35] criteria and components of a prearrest diversion program and
[36:39] we've been meeting since june 2025.
[36:42] the task force is on pace for providing recommendations to
[36:45] council as required by the july 2026 deadline.
[36:49] we also convene a substance abuse treatment and mental
[36:52] health services integration task force, a mouthful, we refer to
[36:58] it as of samson and use it for those individuals who have
[37:04] substance abuse and mental health challenges.
[37:07] starting in 2025 and continuing into this fiscal year, they've
[37:11] been focused on collecting data on drug court and mental health
[37:14] court participation and outcomes, supporting d.b.h. And
[37:18] updating the criminal justice strategies in districts live
[37:21] long strategic plan and addressing gaps in the
[37:26] sequential intercept model. The priorities for our
[37:32] incarceration and community corrections committee were to
[37:34] seek options for moving individuals seeking post
[37:39] combination rips or seeking early release from the court
[37:42] from b.o.p. Facilities to local facilities.
[37:45] second, we focused on understanding and addressing
[37:49] long lengths of stay for pretrial defendants in secure
[37:52] facilities. The first issue, the marshall
[37:54] service, a member of the cjcc was able to reach an agreement
[37:59] with northern neck jail in virginia which is about a
[38:01] two-hour drive from the district to temporarily house persons
[38:04] convicted of d.c. Code offenses who are seeking post conviction
[38:13] rits under the cars race amendment act.
[38:15] this will enable these individuals to more readiliy
[38:19] engage in defense counsel and avoid challenges with attorney
[38:23] visits at the facilities. The iopc looked at cases with
[38:31] title 16 youths, who had long, lengthy stays as well as
[38:35] defendants with long lengths of stay at d.o.c.
[38:38] for the title 16 youth their length of stay was not out of
[38:42] the norm for the adult criminal justice system but much longer
[38:46] than pretrial lengths of stay for the juvenile justice system
[38:50] which is the population d.r.s. Typically manages.
[38:54] title 16 youth are reps transferred from d.o.s. To
[38:57] d.o.c. Custody when they turn 18.
[38:59] through the work of this commit, d.r.s. And d.o.c. Agree to
[39:03] establish a data sharing structure to help d.o.c.
[39:09] adequately prepare for safety and programming needs of the
[39:11] incoming youth. With respect to pretrial
[39:14] defendants in d.o.c., unlike the title 16 youth, the committee
[39:18] did find that they have unique issues associated with their
[39:23] cases. Case processing delays were
[39:26] related to discovery disputes, motions for forensic testing,
[39:31] changing their defense counsel frequently, motions to suppress,
[39:35] and having multiple open cases. Filling vacant judicial
[39:40] positions will help expedite case processing for these
[39:44] defendants. And finally, automated
[39:47] information sharing. Cjcc's information technology
[39:50] advisory committee or the itac serves as the body for justice,
[39:57] the integrated justice information system that
[39:59] facilitates near real time information sharing among public
[40:02] safety and criminal justice system stakeholders.
[40:05] during fy-25, the cjcc members elected to resemble to work
[40:11] groups under the itec umbrella, the kirk work group and sealing
[40:17] expungence and set aside work group.
[40:19] this past year the coop updated the juvenile justice systems
[40:27] which hadn't been updated since 2012 and it identifies each
[40:32] member's functions and the point of contact if a disaster were to
[40:35] occur. We also have the secs work group
[40:41] which identifies mechanisms to implement the expungent systems
[40:46] of the amendment act of 2022. The work group in consultation
[40:50] with code for america and the clean slate initiative
[40:55] determined that justice would serve as the best platform for
[41:00] identifying eligible records. However, to make it work, cjcc
[41:03] would need permission to store court data, corrections data and
[41:10] no paper data in justice indefinitely and to use those
[41:13] agency's data for those specific purpose.
[41:16] unfortunately most of the agencies whose data we would
[41:20] need to identify eligible records, most are federal, do
[41:23] not have the data in a format that can be shared with justice.
[41:27] they refuse to allow cjcc to store their data indefinitely or
[41:31] refuse to allow cjcc to use their data for this purpose.
[41:37] the s.c.s. Work group is working for a solution but without the
[41:41] participation of the relevant agencies and implementation of
[41:43] the automatic ceiling and expungement purposes of the act
[41:49] seem unlikely. Lastly, staff accomplishment
[41:53] also. Of course the work of the
[41:56] committee is successful due to the implementation of their
[42:00] staff and also successful due to the hard work and highly skilled
[42:04] staff who support the work of our members and stakeholders.
[42:07] we do that in four ways. We facilitate automated
[42:10] information sharing and conduct research and analysis.
[42:14] we facilitate interagency collaboration and provide
[42:17] training and technical assistance.
[42:20] with respect to justice where we facilitate automated information
[42:25] sharing and fy-2025 justice had a million records and 3700 users
[42:31] across 33 agencies. We averaged 760 log-ins per day
[42:36] and 4,200 searches per day. Cjcc continues to receive high
[42:42] marks on the annual justice user's survey and more than 90%
[42:48] of respondents reported justice was necessary for conducting
[42:51] their work and that they are satisfied with their justice
[42:55] experience. Our I.t. Team has not become
[42:59] complacent, however, because of the positive user feedback
[43:03] instead they continue to seek opportunities to enhance the
[43:06] system. We fine-tuned the quarry process
[43:09] and enhanced system security and enhanced information into the
[43:13] search function and generated new supports.
[43:15] of a particular note we continue to be on track to complete our
[43:19] justice modernization project in 2027.
[43:24] our statistical analysis center or the s.a.c. Generated 129
[43:30] research and analytical products including routine reports and
[43:33] one time analysis. Our primary focus has been to
[43:35] develop and maintain the 20-plus monthly and quarterly dashboards
[43:41] required by secure d.c. And to maintain jsat which is the
[43:47] platform the dashboards live. Since the dashboards were
[43:52] published a average visits increased by 355% since fy-23.
[43:57] for interagency collaboration, our bread and butter as a
[44:01] coordination council, in fy-25, we convened 101 meetings and
[44:06] served as project managers for 21 multiagency initiatives.
[44:11] making progress on our initiatives require frequent and
[44:14] consistent engagement with our partner agency and stakeholders
[44:18] and to do that we must have a fully staffed policy team.
[44:22] we're happy to say we're going to complete interviews for our
[44:27] final vacant policy position by the end of this month and hope
[44:30] to make a selection soon. And in training and technical
[44:34] assistance. We typically do this in the form
[44:36] of public meetings and webinars, information sessions.
[44:39] we had one public meeting this year that was focused on drug
[44:42] court and hosted four information sessions on topics
[44:45] ranging from risk assessments for adults, rehabilitative
[44:50] models for adult correctional facilities and addressing youth
[44:53] violence. And after a six-year hiatus, we
[44:58] reconvened our information sharing form and was an
[45:00] opportunity for users of our justice system to come together
[45:03] to share how the system supports their daily work and they
[45:07] identified information sharing gaps and itec we'll prioritize
[45:11] and determine how best to address those gaps in fy-2026.
[45:16] in kleeing, I want to publicly acknowledge the cjcc staff.
[45:20] they continue to be unwavering in their dedication to providing
[45:26] critical information and support to the district's justice system
[45:30] often behind the scenes. And I also want to acknowledge
[45:33] the members of the cjcc in spite of the current environment and
[45:39] changes over the past year, they continue to show up and find
[45:43] common ground and they've identified meaningful efforts
[45:46] that will enhance justice system functioning.
[45:49] I look forward to their continued collaboration in the
[45:51] year to come. And so that concludes my
[45:54] statement. I'm available for questions.
[45:58] chairman pinto: great. Thank you very much, director
[46:00] love. I'd like to add my gratitude to
[46:03] you and your entire team and all the members of the cjcc who at
[46:09] its core share a belief that everybody deserves to be safe
[46:12] and appreciate all of your efforts, to make that a reality.
[46:17] I want to ask you a little bit more about justice.
[46:20] you talked about some of the importance of the modernization
[46:23] project but can you zoom out and elaborate a little bit why it is
[46:28] so important to have a common language of data that we're
[46:35] using in analyzing what is coming in, whether it be from
[46:39] the attorney general's office or the courts or otherwise and how
[46:43] that informs your policy recommendations?
[46:47] director love: so justice is an operational system, so that
[46:51] means it's not used for research and analysis in general but used
[46:55] to really help the criminal justice system function.
[46:59] and justice is the system that the criminal justice
[47:02] stakeholders use to communicate to one another.
[47:05] so, for example, when m.p.d. Makes an arrest, the way they
[47:09] communicate they've made an arrest and refer to it to the
[47:13] prosecutors is through justice. There's information that flows
[47:16] through that system, o.a.j. And u.s.a. Are aware there's been
[47:20] arrests. When the prosecutors make a
[47:22] decision, are they going to pay for the case, meaning to charge
[47:26] the case in court or not? That decision is communicated to
[47:30] the m.p.d. As well as to the court and others.
[47:34] there's information on pretrial supervision.
[47:37] there's information on drug testing results for defendants.
[47:46] court case information is available on justice.
[47:50] and if someone violated their rules, that is made through
[47:54] justice as well as incarceration information.
[47:56] it really is a critical system and when we have the information
[48:01] sharing form, we have partners to say I can't imagine how I
[48:05] would do my job if this system did not exist.
[48:08] so that's the importance of it. We do appreciate council
[48:15] providing the capital funds last year to enable us to engage in
[48:18] the justice modernization project and the reason we're
[48:21] doing the project is because the software that really undergirds
[48:26] the function of justice is going to reach end of life in january
[48:31] of 2027 and so I've just described the importance of the
[48:34] system. It has to continue to function.
[48:36] so reusing those funds to rebuild justice on new
[48:40] technology, we're going to upgrade the interface.
[48:43] it hasn't been upgraded in about 20 years.
[48:46] then we're also going to shift the system to the cloud.
[48:52] chairman pinto: ok. You talked about some of the
[48:54] hurdles you're having in implementation of the second
[48:58] chance amendment act. What would the upgrades for
[49:02] software enable you to implement the second chance amendment act
[49:07] once all of that takes place on the crowd?
[49:11] director love: there will be complex coding because we have
[49:13] to match cases with specific charges with sentence completion
[49:17] dates. And so the new justice 2 point 0
[49:24] will allow for that but it's not a technology challenge but
[49:29] getting permits to use the data for this purpose and also
[49:33] getting them to agree to -- in order to match data in the
[49:37] system we have to store their data and right now we have a
[49:42] number of agencies that told us they won't permit us to store
[49:46] their data. Chairman pinto: which agencies
[49:48] are those? Director love: b.o.p. Said we
[49:52] cannot store their data in justice.
[49:54] b.o.p. Also has a restriction that -- for detailed sentence
[50:00] completion information, that they're not able to share that
[50:04] with nonlaw enforcement agencies, which would include
[50:06] the court because the court is the one that needs to be aware
[50:10] of the eligible cases because the court makes the notification
[50:14] to all the other partners they need to seal and expunges cases.
[50:22] sosa said yes and there may be some conditions but are willing
[50:25] to participate. D.c. Superior court, they've
[50:27] been a partner and really a champion in this.
[50:31] so the only thing is -- there are a number of scenarios how a
[50:36] sentence ends. We may all think of prison or
[50:41] jail but we have probation and parole with sosa and also have
[50:48] u.s. Probation is another agency that said no, we cannot use
[50:50] their data for this purpose. Then we have b.o.p., of course,
[50:56] and u.s. Parole commission is another agency.
[50:58] I think maybe they would be willing to share, they just
[51:04] don't store sentence completion that can be stored with justice.
[51:07] either the data is not in athatt in a shareable format with the
[51:14] agencies don't want us to use the data for this purpose.
[51:15] >> are all the agencies that have said no federal agencies?
[51:22] >> yes. We are still waiting to hear
[51:23] back from doc. They are the only agency we have
[51:26] not heard back from. I should add, the implementation
[51:32] of these automatic sealing and expungement provisions, we put
[51:35] them in three buckets. The bucket I have been mostly
[51:39] talking about are cases that are paper with a convention.
[51:42] the other is paper, no conviction.
[51:46] that is data we anticipate the court will say yes.
[51:49] then you have no paper cases. Again, I described justice has
[51:55] no paper information. Oag says, yes, you can use our
[51:59] no data paper for this purpose. The u.s. Attorney's office has
[52:02] said no. So, we are in count --
[52:06] consultation with m.v.p. -- with mpd.
[52:18] >> are there other members of cjcc from federal government who
[52:27] can be leaned on to ensure that the federal agencies participate
[52:36] in this law? >> most of them have said no.
[52:43] right now, the court is a local entity that is federally funded.
[52:49] I anticipate they will say yes. Sosa right now is the only
[52:54] federal agency that is relevant to this that have said yes.
[52:59] I have mentioned bop, they said no.
[53:02] parole commissions does not have the data in the format.
[53:05] u.s.a.o. Is a no. When you think of structure, the
[53:13] u.s. Attorney's office, but chief law enforcement officer
[53:15] and a leader in the federal government side, so I feel like
[53:18] if they have said no, it is a little difficult to compel
[53:23] others to say yes. X is the u.s. Attorney's
[53:27] objection substantive, that they don't agree with the policy
[53:32] versus not having the software or data functionality to
[53:34] implement it? >> we didn't get a detailed
[53:39] explanation for why they are not permitting us to use their data
[53:43] for this purpose. I do feel like the u.s.
[53:46] attorneys office has been very vocal to their opposition, so I
[53:52] imagine there could be a connection.
[53:54] >> let's continue our conversation about that and
[54:03] ensuring that the law that we pass can be implemented and that
[54:07] we can keep moving forward that way.
[54:14] can you talk about some of the other data barriers you have
[54:17] experienced over the last year, especially in amassing aggregate
[54:20] data, whether it is with pretrial detention reports or
[54:29] other areas where we need to collect data from the courts and
[54:33] oag and others and how that has looked over the last year?
[54:36] >> sure. I will turn it over to dr. Tabor
[54:41] to give a little more detail, but I mentioned justices and
[54:47] operational system, and we receive data separately to do
[54:51] data and analysis. But a data challenge we have had
[54:54] in common on the operational and research side has been limited
[54:59] access to juvenile justice data. I mentioned we had the
[55:03] information sharing form. The top issue of what are your
[55:09] information sharing challenges and gaps, the top issue is lack
[55:14] of juvenile justice information in justice.
[55:17] if you look at what flows through justice on the adult
[55:22] side, the court has a very substantive feet of case
[55:26] information flowing on the adult side, and that information is
[55:29] available to the prosecutors and public defenders and pretrial
[55:33] services, but there is no comparable court fee on the
[55:37] juvenile side, so there is no court data flowing from one
[55:41] agency to another. You can search it one by one but
[55:44] that is very time intensive for an agency partner to do.
[55:50] the second piece of information that is missing is juvenile
[55:54] arrest data. Arrest adult data flows through
[55:57] justice, readily accessible. There is no juvenile arrest data
[56:03] that is even searchable, let alone flowing through justice.
[56:08] those are the two big impediments.
[56:11] there are a few other data challenges related to justice
[56:15] that we are going to explore with our committee.
[56:18] I will turn it over to dr. Tabor, who can talk about some
[56:21] of the challenges we have had on the research and analysis side.
[56:27] >> I'll try to get close to the microphone.
[56:33] you mentioned the pretrial detention report.
[56:35] some of the issues we had with the pretrial detention report
[56:39] was attempting to identify exactly those individuals who
[56:42] were affected by the prioritizing public safety
[56:45] emergency amendment act and the pretrial detention provisions.
[56:51] those provisions affected people based on charges, criminal
[56:55] history, supervision history, and the legal standard that was
[56:59] found at arraignment. Unfortunately in data that was
[57:04] extractable from partner agencies, only charge
[57:07] information was available, so we were not able to exactly
[57:10] identify which people would have been detained or eligible for
[57:14] the rebuttable prevention of detention following those laws,
[57:18] but not before. So, that was a main challenge.
[57:21] another challenge was the availability of juvenile data as
[57:25] well, as director love mentioned.
[57:30] >> were those challenges overcome over the last year?
[57:33] or is that still a challenge? >> I think that is still a
[57:38] challenge. We are continuing to explore
[57:39] with some of our partners, whether we might be able to
[57:45] obtain additional detailed information.
[57:47] for the report coming up in september, we have several
[57:51] strategies we are exploring to try to obtain individual level
[57:54] data that is de-identified but record level to do our
[57:59] statistical analyses. We will still have some
[58:01] limitations. >> ok.
[58:04] what if you randomly selected 100 cases and looked at those as
[58:08] opposed to looking at every case over the last several years?
[58:11] >> are you suggesting a specific case review, for example?
[58:17] doing something that is more qualitative in nature?
[58:18] >> rights. I am just thinking out loud.
[58:24] a way to provide the analysis, but with these data limitations,
[58:29] maybe instead of looking at every case that went through,
[58:33] you take a randomized sampling, then consider the but for that
[58:41] intervention, what would happen in that case?
[58:42] >> it would create some context for qualitative analysis.
[58:49] thinking about that suggestion, I would you not to use a mixed
[58:53] methods approach to do both a series of case studies and to
[58:56] try to continue our quantitative analyses and take a statistical
[59:01] approach that lets us look at the entire sample of people
[59:04] affected by the laws. But I think a mixed
[59:09] method approach is appreciated. >> are you all on track to
[59:12] produce the report? >> I believe so at this time.
[59:15] >> ok. So, how are you going to
[59:19] overcome the data hurdles? >> I think we are having
[59:23] additional discussions with pretrial services.
[59:26] that is an agency we may be able to lean on to get some
[59:30] information, so we will have that conversation with them and
[59:34] get back to you to let you know if the ability to meet the
[59:38] deadline is going to be affected.
[59:39] >> I will just say, I don't think I could return to my
[59:46] colleagues and ask for another extension.
[59:51] >> understood. If they are able to accommodate
[59:53] and provide the data, we can meet the deadline.
[59:56] what will hurt us is if they are not able to provide the data do
[1:00:00] to maybe the privacy act. >> who is they?
[1:00:02] >> the pretrial services agencies that we think might
[1:00:09] have the data that can meet the needs of the report.
[1:00:14] again, our federal partners are under the privacy act.
[1:00:16] privacy act says you cannot share record level identifiable
[1:00:21] data with non-law enforcement entities, or for research and
[1:00:27] analytical purposes. There are some circumstances
[1:00:31] that they will share. For example, if we can present
[1:00:35] them with specific individuals and they give us input on those
[1:00:42] individuals, that is the circumstance that maybe they can
[1:00:44] share. But if we are going to them
[1:00:47] asking them to generate information on individuals from
[1:00:51] scratch, that is usually where they say we are not able to do
[1:00:53] that. >> all roads lead back to the
[1:00:56] privacy act. >> they lead to the privacy act.
[1:00:58] >> for the public, while we cannot change that law locally,
[1:01:05] it is something I do think we should seek to change fed overly
[1:01:11] -- federally so we can have research to understand these
[1:01:15] crime data trends so we can have the best policy moving forward.
[1:01:19] just put that out there. And something we need the
[1:01:22] federal government to act on. >> I just want to add a couple
[1:01:30] more data issues. On the juvenile side for some of
[1:01:34] our dashboards, we have not been able to produce a juvenile
[1:01:40] dispositions dashboard. The disposition, we were focused
[1:01:47] specifically on dispositions for gun possession and violent crime
[1:01:52] with gun cases. We have been working for the
[1:01:56] past year or more with both the court and oag, trying to figure
[1:02:01] out how best to get that information.
[1:02:03] some of it stems from what I just shared about justice, that
[1:02:10] the juvenile prosecutors are not getting information about
[1:02:13] juvenile case dispositions in their records management system,
[1:02:15] similar to how you soa have. These operational gaps are also
[1:02:24] affecting our ability to do research and analysis.
[1:02:30] we are in the process of engaging in data sharing
[1:02:35] agreements with a lot of our partners, and especially on the
[1:02:38] juvenile side. We understand that juvenile
[1:02:43] confidentiality is important, so we used to get some record level
[1:02:46] data from oag, but they paused on that and said, let's get that
[1:02:52] data sharing agreement in place so we have appropriate
[1:02:54] parameters for how cjcc is using that information.
[1:02:58] they have been giving us aggregate data, which has been
[1:03:02] helpful. However, the way we built the
[1:03:04] dashboards, they are supposed to be interactive and you can click
[1:03:09] on subcategories and all the data changes so you can peer
[1:03:13] into the subcategory. When we get aggregate data,
[1:03:15] while we appreciate it, it does not allow for that
[1:03:19] interactivity. It also does not allow us to do
[1:03:22] rearrest analysis, and I know that has been a question that
[1:03:24] has come up. People want to know how often
[1:03:31] they are rearrested. If we do not get record level
[1:03:34] identifiable data, cannot match against the mpd data, we cannot
[1:03:39] do rearrest analysis. >> are you confident that if
[1:03:46] that data at a record level was shared with cjcc staff, not
[1:03:51] members, not the public, that it could then be re-aggregated in
[1:03:56] order to protect the privacy of each young person?
[1:03:58] >> yes. And we have had similar
[1:04:05] arrangements with other agencies.
[1:04:07] for example, we've received information from osse in the
[1:04:12] past and dbh in the past, d chf, and the agreement has been yes
[1:04:17] you can get the data but you need to put it on a standalone
[1:04:20] computer that is not connected to network, then de-identify and
[1:04:24] do all the analysis and destroy the original data.
[1:04:28] so, we have had other agreements where we have done that.
[1:04:31] if that is what oag and others think is necessary to protect
[1:04:35] juvenile data, we are happy to do that as well.
[1:04:38] >> but to date, they won't share the data?
[1:04:40] >> not record level data, until we can get this data sharing
[1:04:47] agreement finalized. We sent that back to them may be
[1:04:51] a month ago, so hopefully we can move forward on that.
[1:04:55] >> ok. That would be great.
[1:05:01] it is something I spoke to the attorney general about at our
[1:05:05] oversight hearing a week or two ago because it is an important
[1:05:09] part of the operation, so hopefully we can have some
[1:05:13] progress there, and soon. Can you talk about the need to
[1:05:19] obtain d.c. Superior court administrative orders in your
[1:05:24] ability to access certain juvenile data, and how that is
[1:05:28] impacting your ability to produce these reports on a
[1:05:31] timely basis? >> yes.
[1:05:35] going back to the juvenile confidentiality statute, and I
[1:05:39] am main lean on that a little bit for detail, but you have
[1:05:43] juvenile case records, juvenile law enforcement records, and
[1:05:46] social records. For a specific provision for
[1:05:52] each of those, there are certain types of agencies that can have
[1:05:57] access to inspect or copy those records.
[1:05:58] cjcc is not listed among any of those agencies.
[1:06:04] it is typically the agencies that are supervising law
[1:06:08] enforcement, the court, prosecutors.
[1:06:11] the way we are able to get access to juvenile data under
[1:06:15] those statutes is there is a provision that the court can
[1:06:22] provide access, and maybe I will turn to you.
[1:06:27] >> certainly. As director love said, there are
[1:06:30] three separate statutes, each of which contains a provision that
[1:06:34] says other persons -- the court may grant the authority to
[1:06:39] inspect records to other persons having a professional interest
[1:06:42] in the protection, welfare, treatment, and rehabilitation of
[1:06:46] the respondent, if authorized by rule or special order of the
[1:06:49] court. Because we are not the criminal
[1:06:53] justice coordinating council, we are not listed on the
[1:06:58] list of entities to inspect the records, that is limiting our
[1:07:02] approval to get records that are otherwise protected by each of
[1:07:04] those statutes. >> so, the process of getting an
[1:07:11] administrative order, we submit it, but the court has a lot of
[1:07:15] requests coming its way. I think we have at least 20
[1:07:22] administrative orders, because every time we want to do a new
[1:07:26] analysis that involves juvenile data, we have to get an
[1:07:31] administrative order from the court.
[1:07:33] that is our only way to get access.
[1:07:36] sometimes we have gotten orders issued in a matter of months,
[1:07:41] and then we have maybe a couple. It has been almost a year since
[1:07:47] we made the initial ask for an administrative order.
[1:07:52] so, it can be time-consuming, both for cjcc staff and the
[1:07:56] court that has to write these orders and issue them.
[1:08:00] it can also prevent us from generating juvenile analysis in
[1:08:03] a timely manner. >> thank you.
[1:08:08] well, I hope to address that very soon in a bill we are
[1:08:14] considering to streamline that process for you all, so thank
[1:08:17] you for raising that. Can you provide an update on the
[1:08:27] domestic violence working group, how that is going and if there
[1:08:30] are any trends that the group has identified, or policy
[1:08:35] recommendations you are considering to address a very
[1:08:39] concerning continuing trend around domestic violence we are
[1:08:43] seeing in the district? >> we actually had our kickoff
[1:08:46] meeting yesterday, and we have director jennifer porter from
[1:08:51] the office of victim services and justice grants, and denise
[1:08:55] beck tall cochairing the group. Yesterday, to help frame the
[1:09:01] discussion, we shared some information and maybe it was
[1:09:06] shared earlier that, yes, we are grateful we have seen the
[1:09:09] decrease in homicides over the past couple of years, but the
[1:09:14] domestic violence related homicides are not following that
[1:09:16] downward trend. So, that is a bit alarming it
[1:09:23] really is the impetus for the group to do this work.
[1:09:28] in general, the group is looking at, how can we better hold
[1:09:32] offenders accountable? How can we support prosecutions,
[1:09:36] and how can we give victims voice and make sure they are
[1:09:39] safe? The cochairs took us through a
[1:09:43] helpful exercise yesterday where different agency representatives
[1:09:49] identified what their challenges are.
[1:09:51] some of those challenges are just process related.
[1:09:55] and then the group, we have an online forum, and the process of
[1:10:01] voting to process those challenges.
[1:10:03] but some that have come to light and maybe rose to the top in
[1:10:10] yesterday's discussion was a lack of detailed information
[1:10:14] about stayaway orders. We do have stayaway order
[1:10:19] information in justice. Justice 2.0 will be better, but
[1:10:25] right now justice 1.0 is not super mobile accessible.
[1:10:30] if you have officers in the field, they can pull it up but
[1:10:33] it is not that accessible. I think there is a preference to
[1:10:36] get that into mpd's system. That is a project that we will
[1:10:42] likely take on so they can have information like is this the
[1:10:46] right address associated with the stayaway order?
[1:10:49] we do need to wait for the court to finish its project of
[1:10:54] upgrading its case management system before we can then launch
[1:10:58] into the project. One of the other issues is with
[1:11:03] the issuance of protective orders, and whether or not they
[1:11:06] are even being served, and may be lacking documentation of
[1:11:12] serving those orders. I think those are issues that we
[1:11:15] are going to explore and see what solutions we can come up
[1:11:19] with. I think there is more with the
[1:11:22] voting process that the group went through yesterday that will
[1:11:23] come to the forefront. >> and how often is that group
[1:11:27] set to meet? >> every other month.
[1:11:33] >> every other month, ok. I would like to come to them
[1:11:37] next meeting if I can invite myself.
[1:11:39] >> sure. >> thank you for your focus
[1:11:42] there because I agree those trends are alarming and we need
[1:11:46] to be thinking about our interventions.
[1:11:50] holistically and how to get to people earlier and ramping up
[1:11:53] some of the education work that we heard from some of our public
[1:11:56] witnesses with d.c. Safe. I think it will be important
[1:12:01] there. Last september, cjcc
[1:12:04] commissioned the opportunity consulting group to deepen the
[1:12:06] district's understanding of youth involved violent crime.
[1:12:09] the report lays out several actions for consideration,
[1:12:14] including expanding meaningful career pathways and paid youth
[1:12:17] employment and targeting prevention for high-risk youth
[1:12:20] in neighborhoods. After you receive a report like
[1:12:23] this with a series of recommendations, what are your
[1:12:25] next steps in trying to get those recommendations into
[1:12:29] action? >> this has definitely been a
[1:12:32] focus of the juvenile justice committee, and that is led by
[1:12:35] attorney general schwab and judge higashi, the presiding
[1:12:41] judge at the family court. We have talked about these
[1:12:46] recommendations. The composition of the juvenile
[1:12:49] justice committee is juvenile justice agencies and other youth
[1:12:54] serving agencies. But when it comes to things like
[1:12:59] employment for youth, we realize we have some partners that are
[1:13:03] not at the table. For example, the department of
[1:13:07] employment services. I think for those types of
[1:13:10] recommendations, the juvenile justice committee, we would
[1:13:12] definitely be supporters and champions, but we probably are
[1:13:15] not going to be the group that will be able to expand
[1:13:19] employment opportunities. Our job would be to alert
[1:13:22] relevant agencies to those recommendations.
[1:13:24] I think the group is going to focus on the recommendations
[1:13:27] that are within the justice system.
[1:13:31] one of those is the recommendation to identify the
[1:13:34] high risk youth and have targeted supports for them.
[1:13:38] that is a focus area for the cjcc this fiscal year.
[1:13:44] we had an initial conversation about it a couple weeks ago.
[1:13:48] when you talk about high-risk and especially a concept of some
[1:13:51] sort of list, people get skittish, understandably so,
[1:13:55] because that information needs to be used responsibly.
[1:13:59] so, we have the discussion of, do we flip the order?
[1:14:03] do we first figure out, what are we going to do to support
[1:14:07] high-risk youth, and what is the best way to do that?
[1:14:09] that was one of the reasons we have the session where we
[1:14:12] brought in rocha, we brought in yap, that argue about it --
[1:14:17] evidence based solutions to help high-risk young people.
[1:14:21] we did the continuing of care work.
[1:14:23] we had a site visit to philadelphia and visited a group
[1:14:28] that is working with high-risk young people in philly and has
[1:14:34] had great success. We can look at some other
[1:14:36] models, see what model might be best for the district, then that
[1:14:40] can help inform how we go about responsibly and ethically
[1:14:45] selecting who the high-risk youth are that we are going to
[1:14:47] serve. >> when do you think you will
[1:14:50] have that list? >> I think we are going to have
[1:14:55] to agree on how to select. There is some analysis we have
[1:15:03] done. That was the thing, especially
[1:15:09] gun violence or violent crime in general.
[1:15:11] it is a small number of people who may be perpetuating it.
[1:15:16] we see that on the adult side and we see that on the youth
[1:15:17] side too, that there are some youth we have seen be repeatedly
[1:15:24] arrested for violent crimes in a short period of time.
[1:15:28] perhaps that is one way to identify who we consider to be
[1:15:31] high-risk. But it will have to be a
[1:15:33] consultation with the group. We on our end, we can look at
[1:15:38] what does the research and literature say about best
[1:15:41] practices for identifying these populations.
[1:15:46] I imagine that is something we can do during this fiscal year
[1:15:48] for sure. >> and is there any coordination
[1:15:52] with the dhs pilot to identify truant youth and the kids who
[1:15:57] haven't been going to school for days, sometimes weeks and months
[1:15:59] on end? >> dhs participates in the
[1:16:03] juvenile justice committee, and we actually supported them in
[1:16:09] their analysis of the truancy pilot.
[1:16:12] that is another example of needing an administrative order.
[1:16:15] we have not been able to release that analysis because we need an
[1:16:18] administrative order from the court because it relies on
[1:16:21] juvenile data. So, it has been sitting there
[1:16:26] since last summer, but we need the ao to release it to counsel
[1:16:31] and publicly. We have not yet looked at the
[1:16:34] list of truant youth. My guess is that analysis did
[1:16:40] look at their touches with the juvenile justice system, but we
[1:16:44] are not able to talk about it publicly at this time because we
[1:16:48] don't have the permission to do so.
[1:16:49] >> I think that is a really good example of when a very specific
[1:16:57] administrative rule is hindering access to public information and
[1:17:03] progress. Because we need, especially as
[1:17:04] we gear up on budget, we need access to that report for the
[1:17:09] dhs truancy pilot to know what interventions are working.
[1:17:12] our home visits a great tool? Should we be expanding those?
[1:17:17] but without the report, we are flying blind as policymakers and
[1:17:21] that is not good for anyone. Back to we will be moving's
[1:17:24] shortly a legislation that addresses it.
[1:17:29] then the psychiatric residential facility report is something you
[1:17:33] all came out with that outlines both the financial and
[1:17:37] nonfinancial trade-offs associated with the district's
[1:17:40] reliance on out of state placements and a district based
[1:17:44] facility. Can you briefly summarize some
[1:17:45] of the findings of the report, how cjcc is thinking about that
[1:17:52] analysis moving forward as we consider next steps?
[1:17:54] >> I will just say, on the financial side, we did collect
[1:18:00] some information but we leaned heavily on the work that was
[1:18:03] already done by dbh and the mayor's office of budget and
[1:18:07] performance management to estimate the financial cost.
[1:18:11] dr. Tabor can dive into what are some of those social costs that
[1:18:15] came out of that report. >> certainly.
[1:18:23] one of the main findings we found from discussing with all
[1:18:26] the partner agencies was that the long wait times to placement
[1:18:32] themselves can have a significant mental health effect
[1:18:34] on youth who are awaiting placement.
[1:18:36] they understand they are not moving toward a resolution of
[1:18:41] their case. They are not receiving the
[1:18:44] intensity of mental health care services that they by definition
[1:18:47] need from having been referred to ap atf, and they can
[1:18:52] experience that wait time as rejection, which can exacerbate
[1:18:55] underlying mental health issues. There are also organizational
[1:18:58] challenges, making sure the right credits are in place,
[1:19:02] making sure youth are able to transfer credits back and forth
[1:19:05] between the educational provider and dcps.
[1:19:11] they may come home in the middle of a semester and have trouble
[1:19:15] re-accessing school. And the distance itself can be a
[1:19:19] significant mental health challenge.
[1:19:20] some of these are multiple states away, and it is very
[1:19:23] difficult for youth to be so far away from family, from friends,
[1:19:28] from their local environment, and it also presents challenges
[1:19:31] to having in-person visits with family members, since only two
[1:19:37] people may visit at a time. So, a parent and child may go.
[1:19:40] if both parents go, someone has to take care of other children
[1:19:43] in the home. Then there is the reliance on
[1:19:47] out-of-state pr tf's which presents burdens on staff time
[1:19:54] that many of the staff we talked to felt could be better served
[1:19:57] by engaging with families, with youth, with case management,
[1:20:01] doing the substantial work of trying to provide services and
[1:20:07] support for children. When it comes to reentry, there
[1:20:09] would be a much stronger step down process to enable children
[1:20:13] to reenter back into their communities and families in a
[1:20:16] way that is structured, thoughtful, and forward-looking.
[1:20:19] >> thank you for that. That concludes my questions for
[1:20:26] you all today. I want to always give you a
[1:20:28] chance if you have any closing thoughts or you want to
[1:20:31] highlight something that we didn't get the chance to talk
[1:20:33] about today. >> I just want to publicly thank
[1:20:37] the cjcc staff, the cjcc members for hanging in there.
[1:20:47] it has been an interesting year. And I do appreciate people
[1:20:51] showing up and still caring about public safety in the
[1:20:57] district and investing their time and resources to make sure
[1:21:00] we have a safe city, and to make sure our justice system is fair
[1:21:04] for everyone, and we are trying to operate more efficiency and
[1:21:10] use taxpayer dollars the best way we can.
[1:21:15] so, just a sentiment of gratitude I want to leave with
[1:21:18] today. So, thank you.
[1:21:19] >> thank you very much. As a reminder, some of the
[1:21:24] follow-ups we need to continue working on together to get the
[1:21:27] juvenile data access for the secure d.c. Dashboards, the
[1:21:31] pretrial detention revised report, and any other analysis
[1:21:34] that is needed. The changes to the
[1:21:39] administrative order to be able to release cjcc analysis on
[1:21:43] truant youth, and other analyses.
[1:21:47] continue to work together to identify additional data access
[1:21:52] points to implement the second chance amendment act.
[1:21:55] and then attendance at the next working group.
[1:22:00] fantastic. Thank you and thank you to your
[1:22:03] team for all you do every day. It is vitally important.
[1:22:06] as I mentioned in the opening, I don't think it is something
[1:22:10] everyone in the public knows about.
[1:22:13] as we head into the budget, it is important for the functioning
[1:22:18] and safety and justice of our entire system to make sure cjcc
[1:22:22] is funded and well staffed and you all have the support you
[1:22:25] need, so thank you for all you do.
[1:22:27] appreciate it. We are going to move to the
[1:22:32] office of police complaints. I want to triple check one more
[1:22:34] time that l. English is not here.
[1:22:42] ok. All right.
[1:22:44] we will call director bert cross, the director of the
[1:22:49] office of police complaints -- director marke cross, the
[1:22:54] director of the office of police complaints.
[1:22:58] welcome, director cross. Good morning.
[1:22:59] as you know, it is our tradition to swear in government witnesses
[1:23:03] who appear before it, so if I could ask you to turn on your
[1:23:07] microphone, which is the red button, and raise your right
[1:23:10] hand. >> is it on?
[1:23:11] >> it is on. >> do you swear or affirm that
[1:23:17] the testimony you are about to provide is the truth, the whole
[1:23:20] truth, and nothing but the truth?
[1:23:20] >> I do. >> thank you.
[1:23:24] I know invite you to make any opening statement you have.
[1:23:26] >> thank you. Good morning, chairperson pinto,
[1:23:30] and members of the commission. I am marke cross, the executive
[1:23:34] director of the office of police complaints.
[1:23:37] thank you for the opportunity to testify about the performance of
[1:23:39] the office of complete -- police complaints, and its governing
[1:23:43] body. The mission of opc is to improve
[1:23:46] community trust and the police departments through effective
[1:23:50] civilian oversight. It is a common denominator among
[1:23:54] cities that embrace forward thinking policing concepts.
[1:23:56] in the district of columbia, the role of community participation
[1:23:59] and police oversight is provided by opc and the pcb.
[1:24:04] I'm sorry? Oh.
[1:24:09] all right. How about now?
[1:24:12] thank you. In fiscal year 2025, opc saw a
[1:24:16] continuation of an unprecedented number of complaints filed that
[1:24:19] began in fiscal year 2017, recording an all-time high of
[1:24:23] 1065 complaints, representing a 13% increase over the previous
[1:24:26] year. In fiscal year 20 25, we
[1:24:30] maintained an even better outcome and result from the work
[1:24:33] put into our internal procedures in previous fiscal years, but
[1:24:36] with greater accountability and transparency.
[1:24:40] this was accomplished despite numerous challenges presented by
[1:24:42] a record high number of complaints received during this
[1:24:46] period and the unusual fiscal year 2025 budget constraints
[1:24:50] that every agency experienced. In fiscal year 2025, the large
[1:24:55] number of complaints opc received translated into opening
[1:24:58] 501 new investigations with 147 complaints already opened at the
[1:25:02] beginning of fiscal year 2025 that carried over from fiscal
[1:25:06] year 2024. Opc investigators conducted more
[1:25:08] than 485 complaint related interviews during fiscal year
[1:25:14] 2025. These included 470 community
[1:25:16] interviews and officer interviews.
[1:25:19] one of our top priorities is to continue our efforts in
[1:25:23] minimizing the time it takes to resolve a police
[1:25:27] complaint. Overall in fiscal year 2020
[1:25:35] five, opc resolved 90% of investigations within 100 80
[1:25:38] days. Opc continues to manage its
[1:25:42] investigative efficiency despite receiving a large number of
[1:25:44] complaints. At the end of fiscal year 2025,
[1:25:46] opc averaged 89 days between a case being opened and completed,
[1:25:50] compared to 355 days 10 years ago in fiscal year 2015.
[1:25:56] opc's fiscal year 2017 midyear report was the first glimpse of
[1:26:03] body worn camera data, following the full deployment of
[1:26:08] body worn cameras. Fiscal year 2017 annual report,
[1:26:14] opc reported that on mpd's compliance with its own body
[1:26:18] worn camera usage policies. In fiscal year 2025, 81% of opc
[1:26:22] cases had some sort of body worn camera footage, which is an
[1:26:25] increase from the 77% over the previous year.
[1:26:28] a total of 70% of opc cases with body worn camera footage
[1:26:32] included some kind of body worn camera noncompliance, compared
[1:26:34] to 33% in fiscal year 2024. Nonetheless, body worn camera
[1:26:40] footage exponentially contributes to more efficient
[1:26:43] case processing by our agency. In addition to investigating a
[1:26:48] result, we have the responsibility to identify
[1:26:54] topics for policy recommendations made to the
[1:26:55] mayor, the council, and the chiefs of police of mpd.
[1:27:00] in fiscal year 20 25, pcb published three reports.
[1:27:04] one was the implementation update on the commissions of the
[1:27:07] board from 2023. The duties of firearm licensees
[1:27:13] and stop and frisk data. Opc continuously strives to
[1:27:16] increase the public's awareness of the agency's work and the
[1:27:20] service it provides by participating in outreach to the
[1:27:22] community. Opc has a social media presence
[1:27:25] on its twitter account come on now known as x.
[1:27:30] it's facebook page, linkedin page, and we use these to
[1:27:35] communicate to the community regarding outreach activities,
[1:27:38] policy recommendation reports, protest monitoring activities,
[1:27:42] and operations. These platforms also allow the
[1:27:44] communities communicate with us by bringing community events to
[1:27:47] the agency's attention or contacting us with questions or
[1:27:51] information they might have. In fiscal year 2025, opc
[1:27:55] conducted 31 outreach events to local universities, schools,
[1:28:02] academic or community affairs, neighborhood association
[1:28:03] meetings, and neighborhood commissions.
[1:28:07] opc also presented its interactive training programs at
[1:28:11] various public and charter schools.
[1:28:15] opc also continues its community partners program in fiscal year
[1:28:19] 2025 with 22 community partner organizations.
[1:28:22] our agency is committed to enhancing the operations of the
[1:28:25] community trust in the district police forces that serve the
[1:28:28] nation's capital, and we will continue to work with the
[1:28:32] community, district council, mpd, to improve upon the
[1:28:37] current model of civilian oversight to ensure the
[1:28:39] district's police forces are operating with best practices.
[1:28:45] however, our mission effectiveness is dependent on
[1:28:48] persistent collaboration with mpd.
[1:28:51] this committee and the mayor. Statutory authority ends with
[1:28:55] recommendations and fostered partnerships.
[1:28:58] implementation of the pcb's recommendation is in the hands
[1:29:01] of partners who have authority over mpd and not our agency
[1:29:07] specifically. Opd has experienced an
[1:29:11] unprecedented rising complaints compared to last year.
[1:29:13] as of january 31, 20 26, the agency has received 390 seven
[1:29:19] complaints, a 33 percent increase when compared to the
[1:29:21] same time in fiscal year 2025. The average caseload for an
[1:29:25] investigator sits at 19 cases, which is significantly higher
[1:29:28] than the 10 to 12 cases recommend by best
[1:29:34] practices. To address this increase in
[1:29:35] complaints and avoid a potential backlog, opc has requested
[1:29:39] approval to convert two vacant positions to increase with this
[1:29:45] workflow. These positions were created and
[1:29:47] funded to assist expanded jurisdiction after passage of
[1:29:49] the conference of police and justice reform act.
[1:29:53] although the positions themselves were funded, the
[1:29:55] relevant sections of the statute were either not funded or not
[1:29:58] included in the final version. Opc is comprised of a small
[1:30:03] staff, dedicated district employees who are experienced
[1:30:05] and well versed in police accountability and oversight,
[1:30:10] and regularly exchange information with oversight
[1:30:11] offices throughout the united states and abroad.
[1:30:13] we would be happy to share with the committee any trends and we
[1:30:18] look forward to continuing this discourse on how to improve
[1:30:21] policing in the district. I would like to thank the
[1:30:25] committee for its time and I'm happy to answer any
[1:30:27] questions you might have. >> thank you so much, director
[1:30:31] cross. And thank you and your team for
[1:30:35] all you do every day. I know it is a small but mighty
[1:30:39] team. As you noted, this year there
[1:30:43] has been an uptick in complaints coming in.
[1:30:46] the work that you do has always been, but especially this year,
[1:30:52] and a vital opportunity for the public to make their voice heard
[1:30:55] , to make sure everybody is held accountable.
[1:30:58] we all have to follow the law, including those who enforce the
[1:31:03] law. So, thank you for what you do.
[1:31:05] I want to ask you if you could start with an understanding for
[1:31:10] the public of what the process looks like if someone from the
[1:31:14] public wants to file a complaint.
[1:31:16] how does that work in practice and how can they follow up on
[1:31:19] the status of their complaint? >> of course.
[1:31:23] if anyone wants to file a complaint with our agency, they
[1:31:27] can go online to our online complaint form.
[1:31:29] or they can contact the agency directly via email or telephone
[1:31:32] and we will make sure we send a complaint form to them, via
[1:31:39] regular snail mail or email if they prefer.
[1:31:41] once received, the complaint form has to be signed.
[1:31:46] we begin the process of the investigation, so that begins
[1:31:49] with interviewing the complaint ant.
[1:31:54] then we make requests for body worn camera footage, and the
[1:32:00] purpose is to gather enough information to be able to
[1:32:03] resolve the complaint. Throughout the process, during
[1:32:07] every critical stage of the complaint process, we provide
[1:32:10] updates to the complainant. That's in the form of notices,
[1:32:14] mailed notices or emailed notices.
[1:32:17] however, a complainant is always free to contact our agency and
[1:32:20] speak with a mage -- a manager or the actual investigator.
[1:32:26] >> in a limited staff environment, which I know you
[1:32:29] are in, how do you prioritize complaints coming in?
[1:32:34] is it first-come, first-served? >> it is generally first-come
[1:32:39] first serve. >> in your prehearing responses,
[1:32:46] you referenced that mediation can help accelerate the timeline
[1:32:49] for closing a case. What does mediation look like
[1:32:51] and how has that looked over the past several months.
[1:32:55] >> we found that mediation is a useful tool in resolving police
[1:33:02] complaints and increasing community's trust with both the
[1:33:07] officer and complainant meeting together with a professional
[1:33:10] mediator and reach an understanding about what
[1:33:14] happens. They can both listen to each
[1:33:15] other's side of what occurred, and find some common ground.
[1:33:23] we conduct surveys prior to and after each mediation session,
[1:33:28] and the reviews we receive are overwhelmingly positive as far
[1:33:32] as the process is concerned. The way the process actually
[1:33:36] looks is once we receive the consent of the complainant an
[1:33:40] agreement of the complainant to participate in mediation.
[1:33:43] it is not mandatory for the complainant.
[1:33:46] however, it is mandatory for the officer.
[1:33:51] once the mediation session has taken place, if both the
[1:33:55] complainant and officer agree to resolve the matter through
[1:34:03] remediation, they sign a form and we end up closing the case.
[1:34:08] >> great. In fiscal year 2025 and 2026 to
[1:34:15] date, how many complaints have you received about mpd not
[1:34:19] following the law are related to immigration enforcement?
[1:34:22] >> I believe -- I can't answer that question exactly.
[1:34:30] however, I do know we have received at least three.
[1:34:34] >> why do you say you can answer that question exactly?
[1:34:37] >> I'm sorry, I don't have an exact number.
[1:34:40] I can answer the question but I don't have an exact number.
[1:34:44] the three I am pointing to, they stem from the well-publicized
[1:34:47] incident that occurred outside the bilingual public charter
[1:34:50] school. >> all three of them do?
[1:34:51] >> yes, three people filed a complaint who were there.
[1:34:58] >> interesting. And what is the status of those
[1:34:59] complaints? >> one of them was resolved
[1:35:03] through mediation. The other was closed because the
[1:35:06] complainant did not participate in the process.
[1:35:08] the third one is open and we are conducting a full investigation.
[1:35:13] >> ok, thank you. So, you know in your prehearing
[1:35:20] responses there have been 609 complaints filed since august
[1:35:26] 11, 2020 five, which represents a 20% increase of complaints per
[1:35:30] month and a 25% increase in complaints since august.
[1:35:38] how are you and your staff managing the increase in
[1:35:43] complaints and getting to the resolution?
[1:35:48] and have those recommendations then translated into agency
[1:35:51] action or change this year? >> what we have been doing is we
[1:35:57] have a wonderful staff, very talented investigators, and they
[1:36:01] are very good at managing their time and workload.
[1:36:04] they are doing their best every day to accomplish at least
[1:36:08] something and make some progress on their caseload.
[1:36:12] we have always encouraged our investigators to use that
[1:36:16] strategy as far as resolving complaints or concern.
[1:36:19] my predecessor did and we continue to do it.
[1:36:24] it hasn't quite become unmanageable yet, the caseloads,
[1:36:27] but it is getting to that point at the moment.
[1:36:31] it seems like right now what we are doing is -- it's not that it
[1:36:36] seems, what we are doing is trying to resolve the cases that
[1:36:39] are the low hanging fruit, for lack of a better phrase,
[1:36:44] complaint that would be best resolved through mediation.
[1:36:47] we are trying to make use of all the tools that are enabling
[1:36:51] statute provides us to get to the complaints to resolve the
[1:36:54] complaints. To easily resolve complaints as
[1:36:58] quickly as possible. As you know, some of the cases,
[1:37:02] they generally take more time. Those are now taking a bit
[1:37:07] longer to resolve. For example, we usually have a
[1:37:11] rate of about 10% to 15% as far as cases that aren't resolved
[1:37:19] within 180 days, and I believe we are up to 20% right now.
[1:37:22] and that number grows every day. >> in terms of the next steps
[1:37:28] for action and policy recommendations, the office of
[1:37:33] police complaints and the board came out with their 2020 five
[1:37:38] annual report covering a variety of issues including mpd's
[1:37:42] adherence to recommendations and trends.
[1:37:44] the report noted, and I am quoting, the fy 202557 officers
[1:37:50] received three complaints. 17 officers received four
[1:37:54] complaints. Nine officers received five
[1:37:55] complaints. 11 officers received six
[1:37:57] complaints. Four officers received seven
[1:38:00] complaints. Does opc have recommendations
[1:38:04] for how discipline or retraining should evolve based on whether
[1:38:07] the receiving officer has a continuing level of complaints
[1:38:10] against him or her? >> at the moment, our agency
[1:38:14] does not have the authority to make recommendations about
[1:38:16] discipline. We believe that if we were given
[1:38:21] that authority, we would be able to assist mpd in assessing the
[1:38:28] kinds of discipline it imposes on its officers.
[1:38:30] >> is that authority that just hasn't been given to you
[1:38:34] legislatively? Or that has been determined
[1:38:38] through some other body or arbitration with the union, that
[1:38:40] you are not allowed to provide guidance?
[1:38:42] >> that his authority we have it received statutorily.
[1:38:47] >> ok. But it hasn't been adjudicated?
[1:38:49] >> that is correct. >> interesting.
[1:38:55] >> I believe the comprehensive policing and justice reform act
[1:38:59] sought to provide us with that authority, and it was either not
[1:39:04] funded or not included in the final version.
[1:39:07] >> got it. Thank you.
[1:39:10] does opc communicate whether the officer in question had prior
[1:39:15] complaints against it in your next report?
[1:39:22] if a new complaint comes in and you are reviewing that case, is
[1:39:27] that past history included in your report, even if it is not
[1:39:30] included in a discipline recommendation?
[1:39:32] >> generally no. >> why is that?
[1:39:35] >> we try to assess each incident on the current facts,
[1:39:41] on a case-by-case basis. Because we have no say in
[1:39:44] discipline, the officer's previous behavior generally
[1:39:48] isn't relevant to the actual investigation.
[1:39:51] we are concerning the current facts and circumstances that are
[1:39:54] before us right now. If the officer did something
[1:39:57] bad, it doesn't necessarily mean they did something bad this
[1:39:59] time. >> hmm.
[1:40:08] yeah, I guess I'm just thinking about, especially if it is a
[1:40:13] similar type of complaint, and if it is not resulting in
[1:40:18] discipline, that past context seems to be important in
[1:40:22] analyzing how they are doing as an officer.
[1:40:25] >> I agree 100%. However, because we don't have
[1:40:30] the statutory authority to make those kinds of recommendations
[1:40:33] come out we just don't -- that is what I'm trying to say.
[1:40:36] I'm not saying it doesn't matter, because it does matter.
[1:40:39] the way the system is currently set up, and the powers we have
[1:40:44] been given under our statute, which we don't have the
[1:40:47] authority to make those kinds of recommendations.
[1:40:49] >> your report also concerning leigh noted that 65% of mpd
[1:40:56] officers turned on their body worn cameras late when
[1:41:01] interacting with a complaint. Does ocp have any
[1:41:03] recommendations for how mpd should better train their
[1:41:06] officers and ensure full compliance with their body worn
[1:41:08] camera roles? >> yes.
[1:41:12] they can train the officers -- potentially provide retraining
[1:41:19] to officers. It has been nearly 10 years
[1:41:21] since the initial full deployment of body worn cameras
[1:41:24] by mpd, so perhaps it is time for refresher training.
[1:41:29] however, there is another way as well they can prevent this, and
[1:41:32] that would be by activating the buffer.
[1:41:35] I don't know if you have ever watched body worn camera
[1:41:39] footage. There is two minutes of silent
[1:41:40] film. That is not a technological
[1:41:46] limitation, that is actually choice.
[1:41:48] mpd can enable sound during a buffer but they choose not to.
[1:41:52] they usually point to officer privacy issues, when it comes to
[1:41:58] that. But it has been well settled
[1:42:02] that police officers have a diminished expectation of
[1:42:04] privacy when they are on the job and acting with members of the
[1:42:06] public. >> with you say privacy, is that
[1:42:10] because they might be doing something personal?
[1:42:13] or because they are arriving to the scene and could have a
[1:42:16] privacy issue? >> it is usually because they
[1:42:20] may be doing something personal. >> like getting dressed?
[1:42:21] >> no, not like getting dressed. One of the examples we were
[1:42:27] given is if an officer is talking about their spouse or
[1:42:32] something like that, then something all of a sudden
[1:42:35] happens, they don't want that getting out.
[1:42:36] >> interesting. >> yes, which is kind of odd to
[1:42:41] me too because mpd have access to the body camera when they
[1:42:48] release it. I don't necessarily know if that
[1:42:50] is a valid excuse. >> thank you.
[1:42:51] I will ask the chief about that later today.
[1:42:55] another policy recommendation made in 2023 is mpd has not
[1:42:58] entirely complied with stop and frisk data.
[1:43:05] the recommendation stated mpd should make the stop card
[1:43:12] field in the system to ensure officers are documenting the
[1:43:16] required data for each stop, and mpd should train its officers to
[1:43:20] report the required information for each stop and train
[1:43:24] supervisors to review and verify reports.
[1:43:28] why has mpd not complied with those recommendations?
[1:43:30] >> they have complied to an extent.
[1:43:34] I can't really answer that question.
[1:43:38] mpd would be in a better position to answer that
[1:43:40] question. >> to better phrase it, how do
[1:43:43] the current cards differ from the recommendation?
[1:43:45] >> the current stock card, it is really good.
[1:43:50] I believe it was designed by the aclu.
[1:43:52] I have a version of it right here in front of me.
[1:43:55] it lists all the information that one would want to document
[1:44:01] a stop, the stop type, the reason for a stop, whether they
[1:44:06] ran the person through the law-enforcement database,
[1:44:09] whether there was a search or frisk conducted, the reason for
[1:44:12] the search, was the search consent or nonconsensual?
[1:44:17] but the best part is there is a section for what specific facts
[1:44:21] gave rise to the reasonable suspicion regarding the
[1:44:24] indicated crimes. What specific facts gave rise to
[1:44:28] the original suspicion that the person was armed?
[1:44:33] this section provides some very important information to
[1:44:37] document the stop. Mpd, when we issued this policy
[1:44:41] recommendation, they told us the information we were discussing
[1:44:44] was also present just below the stop card.
[1:44:47] however, if you look at the section just below the stop
[1:44:50] card, what we are seeing and reports are, for example, what
[1:44:54] was the reason for the stop? Individual's characteristics.
[1:45:00] we believe the card provides a greater level of detail and
[1:45:03] would greatly assist mpd in complying with the court order
[1:45:07] in the statute. >> thank you, director.
[1:45:09] that is helpful. We have been joined by my ward 5
[1:45:14] colleague councilmember zachary parker.
[1:45:16] I will turn to you now for a 10 minute round.
[1:45:20] >> thank you, and it is good to see you, director.
[1:45:23] during the jps performance hearing on february 11, the
[1:45:27] deputy mayor noted there was a mediation between mpd and d.c.
[1:45:32] bilingual, which you referenced as well.
[1:45:35] I am assuming opc ran that mediation?
[1:45:36] >> we did. We contract with third-party
[1:45:40] mediators, so we facilitate that.
[1:45:43] >> what was the outcome? >> it was resolved.
[1:45:46] >> what does that mean? >> the complainant and subject
[1:45:51] officer reached an agreement. They found a common
[1:45:53] middleground. >> does that mean a handshake?
[1:45:57] does that mean a monetary agreement?
[1:46:00] what do you mean it was resolved, if you can elaborate?
[1:46:02] >> what that usually entails is we contract with professional
[1:46:07] mediators from outside the district.
[1:46:09] we sit the complainant and subject officer in a room
[1:46:13] together with a professional mediator and they have a
[1:46:15] conversation about what happened.
[1:46:16] what generally happens is they discuss both of their
[1:46:21] perspectives, individual perspectives of what occurred,
[1:46:23] then they will agree to either resolve the case after their
[1:46:28] discussion or not resolve. >> was it determined during that
[1:46:33] mediation that there was collaboration between mpd and
[1:46:34] federal authorities? >> the mediation sessions are
[1:46:38] confidential, so I don't even know the information about what
[1:46:40] was discussed. >> based on the mediation, what
[1:46:45] has opc learned about how to reestablish trust between mpd
[1:46:48] and the community? >> what we found is it is good
[1:46:54] to have individual discussions between members of the public
[1:46:57] and mpd. However, what we have seen is
[1:47:04] the presence of the federal task force has greatly eroded the
[1:47:10] public trust in washington, d.c. >> as well as what appears to be
[1:47:13] a level of gas lighting. I anticipate we are going to
[1:47:17] hear today do breasts examples and incidences where there
[1:47:22] appears to be collaboration. In that february 11 hearing with
[1:47:27] the deputy mayor, she reiterated again, there is no collaboration
[1:47:31] between mpd and ice, or other immigration enforcement
[1:47:39] agencies. There is a direct conflict
[1:47:42] there, and the consequence is diminishment of trust that our
[1:47:50] government agencies are telling us the truth about
[1:47:52] collaboration. One of the things that struck me
[1:47:58] is the deputy mayor said, if neighbors have instances where
[1:48:03] they are seeing collaboration, they can file a
[1:48:06] complaint to opc. She referenced, we just don't
[1:48:09] know the examples that neighbors are referencing.
[1:48:12] even today, you're saying you have only received three
[1:48:16] complaints, all of which seem to center on the d.c. Bilingual
[1:48:21] incident. Is that right?
[1:48:22] >> that is correct. We have not seen many examples
[1:48:27] of collaboration between mpd and --
[1:48:28] >> very money or any? >> very money.
[1:48:35] -- very many. I am tracking what we have seen.
[1:48:41] >> earlier in this testimony, you said you only received
[1:48:45] three. >> I said there's only three
[1:48:46] that I know of. >> that's not what I heard.
[1:48:50] if you can share that, are you able to get that information
[1:48:53] during today's hearing? >> I can definitely get you the
[1:48:57] information afterward. I have a spreadsheet.
[1:49:01] >> can you give a ballpark of how many complaints there might
[1:49:03] be? Are we talking less than a
[1:49:05] dozen? >> definitely less than a dozen.
[1:49:09] >> more than two? >> more than three.
[1:49:12] >> more than three. So, there are complaints that
[1:49:19] neighbors have made about collaboration between mpd and
[1:49:22] federal immigration authorities? >> yes.
[1:49:26] >> that means there is a misalignment between what we
[1:49:31] heard from the deputy mayor and what you are telling us now.
[1:49:34] what we were told on february 11 is there have been no
[1:49:37] complaints. What I heard you say less than
[1:49:39] 10 minutes ago is there have only been three complaints, but
[1:49:42] now we are hearing, maybe there are more complaints.
[1:49:45] >> I said there were at least three.
[1:49:47] I know for a fact of three. >> I am going to keep going for
[1:49:51] the sake of time. When we talk about trust, this
[1:49:55] is part of the factor, and it calls into question what we are
[1:49:58] to believe. Respectfully, executive leaders
[1:50:06] are asking us not to believe our eyes, not to believe what
[1:50:09] neighbors are showing and telling us, which continues to
[1:50:12] be a challenge. In response to question 15b, you
[1:50:17] report that the agency missed its goal of publishing five
[1:50:22] policy recommendation reports. I believe you issued three.
[1:50:25] does opc have plans to put together policy recommendations
[1:50:29] for mpd on the collaboration issue?
[1:50:31] >> yes, yes we do. We are currently drafting that
[1:50:36] right now. As I mentioned before, we have
[1:50:38] been tracking those complaints, and yes, we plan on issuing a
[1:50:42] policy recommendation. >> do you have a sense of
[1:50:43] timeline? >> within the next two months,
[1:50:46] for sure. Just one moment, I would also
[1:50:50] like to much of the fact that we only published three reports
[1:50:54] last year. We didn't meet our goal of five.
[1:50:57] that does fall on me. We had a transition of
[1:51:00] leadership. Our executive director retired,
[1:51:02] then we had our legal counsel go on maternity leave.
[1:51:06] that is the role usually responsible for drafting those
[1:51:08] reports. I was acting as the deputy,
[1:51:11] executive, and legal counsel because I was the only licensed
[1:51:15] attorney left. >> sufficed it to say, stretched
[1:51:17] thin. >> yes, but we believe we owe
[1:51:20] the city and community more policy recommendations.
[1:51:23] we know we can't unring the bell.
[1:51:25] >> it is safe to say that by the end of april, we should expect
[1:51:28] those recommendations? >> yes.
[1:51:31] >> in response to prehearing question 38c, opc notes there
[1:51:35] has been a 25% increase in complaints against mpd
[1:51:40] since august 11 when the federal surge began.
[1:51:42] in fiscal year 2020 six, there has been a 33% increase in the
[1:51:46] number of complaints since the same period in fiscal year 2025.
[1:51:50] is that correct? >> that is correct.
[1:51:53] >> but you are not able to tell me how many of these are related
[1:51:57] to collaboration between mpd and ice?
[1:51:58] >> no. The reason why it is these
[1:52:02] federal task force complaints, it is not just ice agents they
[1:52:05] are with. >> are you able to tell me the
[1:52:09] collaboration between mpd and immigration authorities?
[1:52:11] >> that is the other thing. C1
[1:52:18] it is more complex than that. The number of agents who tend to
[1:52:22] be in the task force and on the teams, it is a wide variety.
[1:52:31] anywhere from the u.s. Marshals to homeland security to irs
[1:52:34] agents. >> I would take any information.
[1:52:39] respectfully. >> right now we received about
[1:52:43] 87 complaints about the federal task force.
[1:52:47] I can tell you that nine times out of 10 it is usually a
[1:52:50] homeland agent. >> walked me through that.
[1:52:55] 87 complaints. Have you mediated or addressed
[1:52:57] all those complaints? >> we have done investigations
[1:53:03] on them. Some of them involved in pv
[1:53:06] officers -- mpd officers. >> excuse me.
[1:53:13] thank you for being here. We cannot have a talk from the
[1:53:18] audience that way. >> it sounds like you have
[1:53:24] addressed although. Or are in the process of
[1:53:27] addressing all of them. >> if there are federal
[1:53:35] authorities, we refer those. I'm not familiar with that
[1:53:41] process. >> what you were discussing
[1:53:49] earlier, you don't have the authority to affect change even
[1:53:54] after investigation. So what happens after?
[1:53:56] >> it depends. >> there is some sort of
[1:54:09] mediation. What other action items result?
[1:54:18] >> if the complaint is unable to be resolved through mediation,
[1:54:32] then we perform a thorough investigation.
[1:54:37] the complaint could be dismissed on merits.
[1:54:41] it could be referred for training.
[1:54:55] >> do you have any number for how many of those complaint
[1:55:00] violations you have had? >> we forwarded a few.
[1:55:06] >> we have many more numbers. Now you know the numbers.
[1:55:18] to your knowledge, none of them relate to collaboration?
[1:55:26] it sounds like once you do that it is out of your control.
[1:55:30] >> we don't have any sick -- say in that.
[1:55:37] >> who has authority over the complaint examiner?
[1:55:56] there were allegations of misconduct.
[1:56:08] what is the most common type of misconduct?
[1:56:16] >> it is how many officers, not how many total.
[1:56:22] >> so far they have been 229 officers.
[1:56:35] what is the most common type of misconduct that you are finding?
[1:56:37] >> the most common type is usually in the harassment
[1:56:42] category. Harassment can encompass that.
[1:56:48] >> could it be that more harassment is happening?
[1:56:52] >> that is happening. >> I am challenging you because
[1:57:01] it seems like the numbers are undermining.
[1:57:10] that is why we are seeing this increase.
[1:57:13] before we were already starting to rationalize why.
[1:57:15] >> is too early to tell of the moment.
[1:57:24] we have received a significant increase in the number of
[1:57:26] complaints. That would correlate.
[1:57:32] with what we are hearing from district residents.
[1:57:38] it is not aligning. We are being told not to believe
[1:57:41] what we are seeing in the numbers.
[1:57:44] we are told not to believe what we are hearing and seeing from
[1:57:46] district residents. That is the definition of gas
[1:57:51] lighting. One last question, does opc have
[1:57:58] any insights on what the current numbers are so high?
[1:58:02] we were just talking about that a little bit.
[1:58:03] >> I think of it a lot of it can be attributed to the federal
[1:58:07] task force. We have seen a number of
[1:58:12] complaints every year. Last year was the biggest issue
[1:58:16] at 12%. There has been increased
[1:58:22] visibility. It is easier to file a complaint
[1:58:26] now. A lot more people know about us.
[1:58:29] this was the first year are majority of complaints came from
[1:58:32] the public. After august, we did receive
[1:58:39] that. That has to do with the increase
[1:58:44] visibility and the increased number of contacts that law
[1:58:46] enforcement is making. >> I will stop there for the
[1:58:50] sake of time. Thank you.
[1:58:52] I do believe it would be a value add to just notify for those
[1:58:57] watching, how does one make a complaint?
[1:58:58] >> you can contact our agency. By email or by phone.
[1:59:06] you can also go to our website. That is easy to fill out.
[1:59:14] as soon as we process it, and investigator will contact you.
[1:59:22] >> there have been other organizations this year that
[1:59:26] have stepped up and provided other opportunities for the
[1:59:29] public to issue a complaint. The aclu is one of them.
[1:59:34] are there any efforts to work with those organizations to see
[1:59:38] what complaints are coming to them especially as there may be
[1:59:44] a lack of education in the public on how to best make a
[1:59:47] mistake -- complaint? >> that is in the works.
[1:59:52] one of our former deputy directors, mild loss, now works
[1:59:56] for the aclu. I would like to get in touch
[2:00:01] with her and see if there is anyway we can work together on
[2:00:04] anything. Our board is in favor of that.
[2:00:09] we discussed that a lot. >> I would ask that you do that.
[2:00:14] I think that will be another good avenue to make sure we are
[2:00:16] following up on those complaints and have a very accurate sense
[2:00:22] of where they are. All I was encouraged to read
[2:00:29] that mpd since most of your policy referrals to the metro
[2:00:36] training facility. Do they then follow up on if
[2:00:43] there are improvements to the training or outcomes based on
[2:00:46] those recommendations that have been sent to the academy?
[2:00:48] >> not in a formal sense. But we do it in an informal way.
[2:00:55] we do evaluate the training process.
[2:00:59] members of our staff attends the annual professional development
[2:01:02] training that is held every year.
[2:01:05] from that we usually have discussions about it.
[2:01:08] we also have informal mechanisms of communicating with the
[2:01:13] trainers at the academy. If we start to see some trends
[2:01:17] that will become alarming, we will contact them.
[2:01:20] and voice our concerns. >> great.
[2:01:26] how many full-time staff do you have?
[2:01:27] >> we have about 30. >> ok.
[2:01:36] thank you very much. I look forward to receiving that
[2:01:39] report and recommendations at the end of april.
[2:01:43] I want to give you a chance to make any closing remarks he
[2:01:48] might have or highlight something we might not get a
[2:01:51] chance to talk about. >> I want to thank my team.
[2:01:56] my entire agency. They do a wonderful job.
[2:02:00] they are very knowledgeable. They are working very hard right
[2:02:02] now. Under hard circumstances.
[2:02:06] I would like to thank the committee for giving me a chance
[2:02:09] to speak today and for its continuing support of our
[2:02:11] agency. The committee and the council
[2:02:15] have always been supportive. We definitely hope that
[2:02:16] continues. >> thank you.
[2:02:21] I will give my thanks to you and your entire team for the
[2:02:24] important work that you do. As a reminder of some of the
[2:02:28] things we talk about, we will be talking about body worn camera
[2:02:34] violations and not activating cameras early enough.
[2:02:38] that is an interesting area to probe.
[2:02:41] we look forward to getting back to us on the total number of
[2:02:45] complaints that involved the federal task force.
[2:02:48] we will need that number. The recommendations you will
[2:02:51] have on federal collaboration that we will expect that the end
[2:02:55] of april. The earlier the better if you
[2:02:57] have that ready. And then a request to work with
[2:03:02] the aclu or any other organizations that are
[2:03:03] collecting complaints so we can all be going off the same page.
[2:03:08] thank you very much for being here today.
[2:03:09] >> thank you. >> ok.
[2:03:13] that concludes. >> I am the witness you have
[2:03:24] been missing. I was delayed by the police.
[2:03:26] I would love to tell you what has happened.
[2:03:28] >> we will hear your testimony and then we will turn to the
[2:03:33] metropolitan police department. Ok.
[2:03:37] welcome. You signed up to testify.
[2:03:48] so we will hear from you together on both.
[2:03:53] would you like your testimony included is a record for both of
[2:03:55] those agencies? >if you can put your microphone
[2:04:00] on. >> hello.
[2:04:03] I should know how to use a microphone.
[2:04:07] you can add my witness testimony to wherever you might like.
[2:04:12] a series of horrifying events of it happening in my life since
[2:04:16] 2017. I have been the victim of
[2:04:19] repeated police brutality of six different occasions.
[2:04:22] I called 91 with her help and the police came and beat me and
[2:04:26] tortured me. One officer and others, a whole
[2:04:41] group of officers came to my house without a warrant or
[2:04:46] probable cause. When I cut out to answer my
[2:04:48] doored naked and wet from the shower, they entered my
[2:04:52] apartment and beat me down and sat on my back and tased me
[2:04:57] while it was wet from the shower.
[2:04:59] I filed a police complaint. They said these officers, they
[2:05:04] found no wrongdoing. That happened on january 26,
[2:05:11] 2021. They charged me with a u.s.
[2:05:22] felony threat. They said I was the mastermind
[2:05:27] of a plot to kill all the white people in america on november 5,
[2:05:32] 2017. They put me under surveillance
[2:05:34] for two years. They terrorized me.
[2:05:37] I lost my job and my family and everything.
[2:05:47] there was a home invasion. Police officers came to my house
[2:05:55] 40 minutes late. I made a call.
[2:06:04] several other officers arrive to my house.
[2:06:05] I told him what happened. I said I'm going back to my
[2:06:09] house to lay down because I'm on bed rest for me being hit by a
[2:06:12] car. These officers attacked me in my
[2:06:20] living room. This was the third time I have
[2:06:23] been attacked. Right now I am charged with
[2:06:30] assaulting a police officer. I would like to show you
[2:06:34] something. This is what has happened to me.
[2:06:52] I have over 40 injuries as I stand before you.
[2:06:59] I have been to war for this country.
[2:07:02] this is how I have been treated. I can no longer afford to pay
[2:07:07] for my house. I lost my job.
[2:07:15] they threatened to kill my five-year-old son.
[2:07:19] because he took pictures and video of police officers dealing
[2:07:22] drugs and guns in a park behind my house.
[2:07:27] these officers who have dealt drugs and guns.
[2:07:36] I reported this. These officers came to my house
[2:07:41] and beat me. There is video evidence of these
[2:07:44] officers. They threatened to kill my son.
[2:07:52] he has been out of the state for three years.
[2:07:56] I filed a report. They investigated it and then
[2:08:00] they seal the report. I am fighting this case.
[2:08:08] against falsified charges. >> I'm so sorry to cut you off.
[2:08:16] I'm so sorry for what happened to you.
[2:08:18] that sounds terrible. We will follow-up with the
[2:08:21] office of police complaints on your case.
[2:08:24] if you have longer testimony you can submit it to the record and
[2:08:26] we will read it through but we do have to move on to our other
[2:08:30] 100 witnesses. >> may I ask that you unseal it?
[2:08:34] >> we will follow up. >> I really want you to know
[2:08:41] that I have been terrorized. For over a decade.
[2:08:47] they have beaten he entailed me and done all kinds of things to
[2:08:51] me. I got to make it part of the
[2:08:52] public record. >> thank you.
[2:08:56] thank you for being here. I am sorry for what you have
[2:09:05] experience. Thank you for being here.
[2:09:08] we are going to turn to the metropolitan police department.
[2:09:13] we will call our first panel of public witnesses.
[2:09:35] welcome all. We are going to begin with our
[2:09:46] u.s. Representative. From the congressional
[2:09:51] delegation. Please go ahead.
[2:09:57] everyone has three minutes to present.
[2:09:59] >> thank you so much for allowing me to be here.
[2:10:04] I come before you not only as a representative but a child of
[2:10:07] immigrants. Does mpd collaborate with ice?
[2:10:16] such a simple question but we rarely get a simple answer.
[2:10:19] what I do see is officers at the scene of ice jump outs.
[2:10:31] whether it is collaboration or looking the other way, we all
[2:10:34] see complicity. Now we are at a crossroads.
[2:10:41] in minneapolis, we saw ice agents removed.
[2:10:46] I saw people rise up for themselves.
[2:10:49] get national attention. They said to get out.
[2:11:00] our mayor thanked our federal occupiers.
[2:11:19] I know we are vulnerable. We can speak on the office of
[2:11:28] the mayor. What can we do to protect
[2:11:33] noncitizens? Let's increase funding.
[2:11:42] we need services to combat this racist agenda.
[2:11:48] we need to allocate millions of dollars for language services so
[2:11:52] our english as second language speakers can get proper
[2:11:55] protections. We need to force mpd to keep
[2:12:01] body cameras on. If they are on our side, it is
[2:12:09] time for them to show it. Lastly, they are building a $300
[2:12:16] million ice complex blocks from my house.
[2:12:21] there has been no opinion on that.
[2:12:23] there are organizations that make billions of dollars that
[2:12:26] are attached to this facility. We need councilmembers to speak
[2:12:32] out against this and resisted. Use our budgetary powers to make
[2:12:36] sure that those who make money off of us are not making money
[2:12:39] of the people who terrorize us. I am calling on you to bring in
[2:12:44] the rest of the council members to hear these conversations.
[2:12:47] it is not enough for you to be here.
[2:12:50] this is one of the biggest conversations.
[2:12:56] thank you. >> thank you.
[2:13:05] >> good morning. Let's talk about police using
[2:13:16] noncertified interpreters. You have an officer trying to be
[2:13:26] an interpreter and an officer. You cannot hold two salaries at
[2:13:29] once. They are saying use a certified
[2:13:38] interpreter. Try to be an interpreter.
[2:13:47] so many time my ex-wife sprayed me, maced me.
[2:13:52] I had to move because of my safety.
[2:13:57] I have a civil protection order on her.
[2:14:00] she violated it. She had me jump at the giant
[2:14:05] called the police. They did nothing.
[2:14:12] the detective called me the n word.
[2:14:17] my mother burst me. If you want to know why people
[2:14:27] like me trust the police. I have to look over my back
[2:14:34] every single day. It will take a death before
[2:14:46] police will do something. They are not going to take my
[2:14:51] family. But for does something.
[2:14:57] this is between life and death now.
[2:15:03] you have done everything. They are not certified as an
[2:15:19] interpreter. You have to use a contractor to
[2:15:26] interpret for the deaf client. I have a problem.
[2:15:36] do you want to know why I cannot trust mpd?
[2:15:42] why do I hate the? She sprayed me and my eyes so
[2:15:48] badly I call the police. The officer looked and said oh
[2:15:52] well, keep going. They said that's the only option
[2:16:04] you have. The police department, we want
[2:16:14] to know why that is happening. Thank you.
[2:16:16] >> thank you. I am so sorry about what you
[2:16:23] experienced. Our team is working with you to
[2:16:25] look into your case. For your testimony from last
[2:16:28] week. We really appreciate you being
[2:16:29] here today. >> hello.
[2:16:37] I am the executive director. I'm here because we are
[2:16:40] experiencing an emergency. Masked gangs of federal agents
[2:16:45] are shooting at, disappearing, and killing people in our
[2:16:50] community. A couple of weeks ago a u.s.
[2:16:51] marshal shot and killed someone. He was a beloved father,
[2:16:58] husband, and sun. Today we will hear from his
[2:17:00] family. It is our collective
[2:17:03] responsibility to make sure there is justice for him.
[2:17:07] and that questions get answered. Why did a federal agent respond
[2:17:12] to the 911 call that resulted in his death.
[2:17:18] this came after dhs agent shot into the cars of black men.
[2:17:21] this task force is literally killing us.
[2:17:27] trump's agents are anonymous to us and that is dangerous.
[2:17:31] officers are required to display badge numbers and names.
[2:17:36] the never obscure their faces. Incident reports carry their
[2:17:41] names. Judges and prosecutors and
[2:17:42] defense attorneys have accurate information when making
[2:17:47] decisions about probable and charges.
[2:17:50] we need federal officers to be subject to the same rules.
[2:17:52] we urge you to cosponsor the full accountability and arrest
[2:17:58] reporting emergency amendment act of 2026.
[2:18:01] it already has seven cosponsors. Including the councilmembers who
[2:18:05] joined us earlier. This is about safety.
[2:18:09] without these identifiers it is impossible for any of us to know
[2:18:11] who is law enforcement and he was a kidnapper.
[2:18:16] I appreciate you sending a letter for more information
[2:18:19] about participation in the task force.
[2:18:21] I totally share your frustration with the response that you got.
[2:18:25] today is your opportunity to hold and beat -- mpd
[2:18:30] accountable. The stakes could not be higher.
[2:18:36] this is an election year. Agents of this regime are
[2:18:38] running around d.c. Unchecked murdering people.
[2:18:44] the goal is to intimidate and destabilize so they can suppress
[2:18:50] consent. We are begging you to reflect
[2:18:54] the power encourage of people in the city.
[2:18:57] to gather this community has 11 demands that are in my written
[2:19:00] testimony. More than 1000 people have been
[2:19:03] disappeared or deported. At the same time, the council
[2:19:08] has taken nearly zero action on any of this siege or the
[2:19:13] recommendations that were put forward on december 12.
[2:19:16] refusing to protect our people is not smart or strategic.
[2:19:19] it is an approach that signals to a regime of bloodthirsty
[2:19:25] pedophiles and racist oligarchs that we are an easy target.
[2:19:29] we are not an easy target. The council needs to make it
[2:19:31] crystal clear that d.c. Will never be influenced by the
[2:19:35] priorities of stephen miller and the occupation.
[2:19:39] stop cooperation and free d.c.. Thank you.
[2:19:43] [applause] >> thank you very much.
[2:19:50] >> thank you. I am a lifelong washingtonian.
[2:19:59] a proud product of dcps and howard university.
[2:20:08] I am your public. I do not feel safe.
[2:20:11] I must briefly acknowledge something important before I get
[2:20:14] directly to my mpd part. So far, the council has stood
[2:20:24] firm. Yesterday, the attorney general
[2:20:27] offered a formal legal opinion confirming the congress failed
[2:20:30] to repeal that law because it was outside the statutory review
[2:20:34] . You are upholding the home rule
[2:20:36] act. You are showing courage.
[2:20:41] remarkably. Stay the course.
[2:20:43] do not read couple the tax law. Do not read couple yourself to
[2:20:50] this regime because what we are facing is not random.
[2:20:55] it is episodic in a pattern of authoritarian consolidation of
[2:21:00] power. You know that when control of
[2:21:02] our budget and they want to bankrupt our city, overwrite our
[2:21:05] local laws, sees authority over police, normalize a federal
[2:21:09] presence in our neighborhood. Your appeasement will not stop
[2:21:15] it. Neither congress nor stephen
[2:21:17] miller nor the white house. Targeting d.c. Because you try
[2:21:21] not to poke the bear. We are already being targeted.
[2:21:26] more than 30 bills seek to override our laws.
[2:21:29] the federal surge is already here.
[2:21:34] flying under the radar will not save home rule.
[2:21:40] courage from the council and the mayor and the cfo and the
[2:21:42] attorney general might. In the interest of time I will
[2:21:47] trust other residents and experts to speak at length about
[2:21:50] the five black men who have been killed at the hands of federal
[2:21:53] agents. I will notwhere is the public om
[2:22:01] our elected officials denouncing that escalation for a traffic
[2:22:04] stop in the middle of the day? In january, I personally watched
[2:22:08] a whole city block outside of metro center flood with federal
[2:22:11] agents responding to a minor disturbance, young ladies in a
[2:22:15] screaming match. I have seen a black man get
[2:22:17] arrested outside of rhode island row, and mpd came to carry him
[2:22:25] away. It is not proportional, it is
[2:22:27] not transparent. It is a militarized spectacle
[2:22:31] that increases fear, doesn't reduce it.
[2:22:33] mpd's mission of promises transparency.
[2:22:40] you may not control federal agencies, but you absolutely
[2:22:44] control mpd. You have the authority and
[2:22:49] obligation to ensure mpd does not become a further conduit for
[2:22:53] unchecked federal power in this city.
[2:22:56] you defended d.c.'s authority in the tax fight.
[2:22:59] that same resolve is required here.
[2:23:01] if the mission is truly justice for all, any form of cooperation
[2:23:06] with militarized federal forces that operate without
[2:23:08] transparency cannot continue. We capitulate out of fear.
[2:23:12] if we have loud notarized tactics to become normalized, we
[2:23:19] have jeopardized our safety and our dignity.
[2:23:22] your leadership is not about calculating if we have the
[2:23:25] cards. Stand up for the people who
[2:23:27] elected you. Even when the federal government
[2:23:30] attempts to intimidate our city into submission, set aside your
[2:23:34] ambitions for your political futures long enough to protect
[2:23:37] my children, my neighbors, my city.
[2:23:39] stand up for d.c. And don't back down, no cooperation with
[2:23:45] occupation. >> I appreciate you all being
[2:23:47] here. Thank you for your testimony.
[2:23:49] I am going to ask everyone to please help me.
[2:23:51] I do hate cutting you off, but we have to keep to three minutes
[2:23:55] each. We have over 100 witnesses and
[2:23:57] we want to make sure everyone gets their time.
[2:23:59] thank you for being here. Thank you for your testimony.
[2:24:02] >> lilie gerkin, abby organ dari, christina hanson, jerome
[2:24:09] hinkle. As you all come up, I will just
[2:24:14] remind folks that I introduced a bill yesterday that does three
[2:24:19] things that allows for access, requires body worn camera
[2:24:23] footage. It requires a listing and
[2:24:28] database from the use of force that has happened this year, and
[2:24:33] requires a maintenance of records for agents and where
[2:24:38] they are being deployed. So, I hope folks can support
[2:24:43] that legislation in getting that across the finish line.
[2:24:46] lilie gerkin. Abby opeogandare.
[2:24:54] christina hanson. Jerome hinkle.
[2:24:58] amad m. Lia cheek.
[2:25:07] commissioner ashley ruff. Raymond tolson.
[2:25:15] tara vanacore. Raymond?
[2:25:22] raymond is here? Great.
[2:25:25] aunt tara. -- and tara.
[2:25:30] wonderful. Ok.
[2:25:33] so, we will begin with lilie -- lei lei gerken, free
[2:25:40] d.c. >> hello, my name is lei lei.
[2:25:46] I am a resident of ward 3 and the mother of a brilliantly
[2:25:50] gifted, courageous, and amazing special needs child.
[2:25:55] I reflect fellow native washingtonians and I am
[2:25:57] testifying today as a constituent, advocate, and
[2:26:01] activist, because I am deeply troubled by the metropolitan
[2:26:03] police department's ongoing coordination with federal law
[2:26:10] enforcement agencies and the lack of accountability that has
[2:26:11] accompanied it. For context, I am profoundly
[2:26:15] disturbed by the killing of julian bailey by u.s. Marshals.
[2:26:20] according to public reporting, mpd did not respond to the
[2:26:23] initial allegation that he had threatened someone with a gun.
[2:26:29] instead, u.s. Marshals service bond it.
[2:26:30] after mr. Bailey's killing, both mpd and u.s. Marshals did not
[2:26:36] meaningfully produce or request -- or provide requested updates
[2:26:45] regarding the status of the investigation.
[2:26:47] the lack of transparency compounds the harm.
[2:26:50] when agencies deflect responsibility instead of
[2:26:53] providing clear answers, it signals to residents that no one
[2:26:56] is fully accountable. When a call is made in any
[2:26:59] neighborhood, we as residents need to know who is responding,
[2:27:03] under what authority, and with what level of oversight.
[2:27:07] federal tactical officers operating in our city,
[2:27:10] especially in response to local allegations, fundamentally
[2:27:14] changes the risk profile of encounters.
[2:27:16] it raises a serious concern about due process and civil
[2:27:20] rights. Armed agents concealing their
[2:27:23] identities, body camera footage delayed were not
[2:27:27] produced, and erodes trust. All residents deserve to live in
[2:27:34] a city where law enforcement is identifiable, accountable, and
[2:27:38] transparent. Instead, we are witnessing
[2:27:40] blurred lines of authority and diminished oversight.
[2:27:43] I understand that the dc council does not control federal
[2:27:47] agencies. However, you absolutely have
[2:27:50] authority over mpd and its participation in joint
[2:27:54] operations in which our residents are being disappeared,
[2:27:57] kidnapped, murdered, and violated.
[2:27:59] you have authority to demand transparency regarding any
[2:28:04] agreements that permit federal agencies to respond to local
[2:28:07] calls for service. You have authority to require
[2:28:11] documentation, reporting, and clear boundaries.
[2:28:15] furthermore, I firmly oppose the appointment of jeffery carroll
[2:28:18] as permanent mpd chief. His previous tenure ended amid
[2:28:23] serious concerns of transparency and leadership judgment.
[2:28:26] at this critical moment when residents are demanding clear
[2:28:29] boundaries between local policing and federal overreach,
[2:28:33] we need leadership that will prioritize accountability,
[2:28:36] community trust, and the protection of civil rights.
[2:28:39] we cannot move forward with leadership that does not commit
[2:28:43] to these principles. >> thank you.
[2:28:50] and please make sure to submit your full testimony and it will
[2:28:52] all be included in the written record.
[2:28:54] thank you so much. Abi ogandare.
[2:28:58] >> hello. I live in ward 1.
[2:29:07] I am testifying as a representative of free d.c.
[2:29:09] because I am concerned about mpd's ongoing cooperation with
[2:29:14] federal law enforcement agencies.
[2:29:16] is that better? In the past years, mpd has
[2:29:21] increased cooperation with federal law enforcement who are
[2:29:23] using violent tactics, especially against black people,
[2:29:27] immigrants, and those opposing their fascist regime.
[2:29:29] they are ignoring the law, lying about incidents, and evading
[2:29:33] accountability for the harm they have caused.
[2:29:35] on the back of every mpd car, they declare, "we are here to
[2:29:39] help." but I have to wonder, who is mpd
[2:29:43] helping when they are racing down u street at dangerous
[2:29:47] speeds to catch teenagers on electric scooters, speeds that
[2:29:49] would get us jailed? Patrolling you street and other
[2:29:58] various agencies, harassing our unhoused neighbors, threatening
[2:30:01] to arrest people for having an unlit joint, disregarding d.c.
[2:30:05] residents. With the officer jingling his
[2:30:07] handcuffs on a woman clearly expensing a mental health crisis
[2:30:10] helping her? Was the officer who skirted up
[2:30:15] to the sidewalk helping them? Mpd demanded I open my purse to
[2:30:23] show them a backpack was not in it.
[2:30:25] were they helping me? Where they helping him?
[2:30:29] there are many people afraid to leave their houses since the
[2:30:32] occupation began. Schools in ward 1 have seen a
[2:30:35] drastic drop in attendance because parents are afraid to
[2:30:37] send their children to school, and children are afraid that
[2:30:39] when they come home their parents will not be there
[2:30:41] anymore. The education budget does not
[2:30:43] have enough funds to ensure every child pre-k-12 has an
[2:30:47] afterschool program to attend, but mpd does have the budget to
[2:30:51] hunt our children as a fun afterschool activity.
[2:30:55] free d.c. Has 11 demands. I am here to talk about numbers
[2:30:59] 4, 5, six, and eight. Prohibit mpd from coordination
[2:31:04] with federal agents in the sensitive locations like school,
[2:31:07] health care facilities, and organizations providing aid,
[2:31:11] repeal local qualified immunity protections for federal officers
[2:31:15] making arrests, as well as officers who enter edc
[2:31:19] school, community center, or house of worship, require mpd to
[2:31:23] file a report on any interactions they have with a
[2:31:26] minor, including conversations on the street, and restrict
[2:31:29] vehicular pursuits for all federal agencies.
[2:31:33] in addition to this request, I oppose any appointment of
[2:31:36] jeffery carroll as a permanent mpd chief.
[2:31:39] I ask you do the same. As a d.c. Resident, I know that
[2:31:42] I cannot rely on mpd to help me, only my community.
[2:31:47] I know we all want a violence free d.c.
[2:31:51] so I asked, what has the dc council done to stop mpd's
[2:31:55] aggressive and often reckless behavior, allowing mpd to learn
[2:31:59] from, coordinate with, and follow the lead of trump's
[2:32:08] federal detention machine is not the way we will achieve that.
[2:32:09] I ask you take action today and heed our demands.
[2:32:10] thank you for your attention on this matter.
[2:32:11] we keep us safe. >> thank you.
[2:32:15] raymond tolson, free d.c. If you could turn your
[2:32:20] microphone on. >> chairperson pinto and members
[2:32:32] of the committee on judiciary and public safety, thank you for
[2:32:37] hearing me today. My name is raymond tolson.
[2:32:41] born and raised right here in ward 7.
[2:32:45] I am one of the cochairs for free d.c. Ward 7.
[2:32:50] I am here today because mpd's growing partnership with federal
[2:32:58] law enforcement has turned every day policing into a pipeline of
[2:33:03] violence, especially against black and disenfranchised
[2:33:07] residents. Since mpd voluntarily joined
[2:33:12] donald trump's d.c. Safety and beautiful task force and mayor
[2:33:19] bowser created the operations center to support it, we have
[2:33:23] watched mpd merge its work with federal agents.
[2:33:30] residents have seen mpd officers traveling with federal agents,
[2:33:35] conducting stops with them, and coordinating -- militarization.
[2:33:45] and the results have been deadly.
[2:33:47] on october 13, a dhs agent opened fire on justin brian
[2:34:00] nelson. On january 21, fbi agents used
[2:34:09] flashbang grenades during a traffic stop on marion barry
[2:34:13] avenue, pointing guns into cars with no justification.
[2:34:19] and on february 12, u.s. Marshals responding to an mpd
[2:34:27] request shot and killed julian bailey in mayfair.
[2:34:33] the list goes on, as stated in my testimony that was emailed to
[2:34:37] you. Dhs has repeatedly lied about
[2:34:42] these shootings. This is a system where federal
[2:34:45] power is being funneled into local police.
[2:34:57] meanwhile, mayor bowser appoints jeffery carroll as interim
[2:35:03] police chief. His history is aggressive -- his
[2:35:10] history of aggressive tactics to first amendment rights.
[2:35:18] I urge this committee to investigate mpd collaboration
[2:35:23] with federal enforcement, close the immigration enforcement
[2:35:27] loopholes, advance the safety community police amendments, and
[2:35:34] reject jeffery carroll's nomination of permanent
[2:35:41] chief of police. >> thank you.
[2:35:45] tara vanacore, free d.c. >> good afternoon, chair pinto,
[2:35:54] and members of the committee. My name is tara vanacore and I
[2:35:58] live in ward 1. I am testifying today as a
[2:36:01] representative of free d.c., and as the pto president at a title
[2:36:06] I dcps elementary school. I urge the council to consider
[2:36:10] the detrimental effect that mpd's cooperation with federal
[2:36:13] law enforcement agencies is having on public safety and our
[2:36:17] city. I begin by quoting a neighbor
[2:36:18] who does not feel safe submitting testimony.
[2:36:22] federal agents are terrorizing our community members and we
[2:36:24] need to feel safe going to mpd. I couldn't agree more.
[2:36:27] I live in columbia heights, which has been relentlessly
[2:36:30] targeted by the president's d.c. Safe and beautiful task force.
[2:36:34] the joint actions of mpd and federal immigration agents are
[2:36:38] creating an atmosphere of fear and isolation in my
[2:36:40] neighborhood. Too many are unable to share
[2:36:41] their stories today. At my kids school, which is
[2:36:47] majority black, brown, and immigrant, we have had several
[2:36:51] for emily's self deport since spring of 2025.
[2:36:53] some have left to follow a parent who has been taken.
[2:36:57] others to avoid for separation. It is reflected in enrollment
[2:37:05] and the budget. Each time I learned of a family
[2:37:07] leaving, I wonder if it is a classmate of my second or fourth
[2:37:10] grader. Forced to start a new life in a
[2:37:13] country they may never have visited.
[2:37:15] just last month, the pto board organized a fundraiser for a
[2:37:18] family of five that was leaving d.c. Within the week.
[2:37:23] we have had parents ask for help walking their kids to school
[2:37:26] because masked agents were staked out in front of their
[2:37:28] building. There was a raid in an apartment
[2:37:31] building nearby in which agents who did not have a warrant enter
[2:37:34] the home and arrested three people.
[2:37:36] as a result, families who live in that building have kept their
[2:37:39] kids home. We provide essential services
[2:37:43] beyond the curriculum, from health checks to groceries to
[2:37:45] clothing for the family. Our families are being
[2:37:48] intentionally deprived of these resources.
[2:37:51] following the mayor's director, families facing threats to their
[2:37:54] safety are on their own. They cannot rely on mpd to
[2:37:57] protect them. Increasingly, mpd joins the
[2:38:01] operations I just described. A photograph I will never forget
[2:38:03] is mpd, fbi, and hsi agents standing in the cardoso high
[2:38:08] school parking lot overlooking a football game in september 2020
[2:38:11] five. We have now seen the perceived
[2:38:14] unruly behavior at such a game might end in detention,
[2:38:18] deportation, or worse. Last spring, helped order toys,
[2:38:23] water, and food. The thought that a member of our
[2:38:28] community might need to hide in an elementary school for days or
[2:38:31] weeks defies belief. What is more disturbing is that
[2:38:34] our police department, whose job should be to protect d.c.
[2:38:37] residents from the inhumane attacks of the administration is
[2:38:40] working to harm those who are most vulnerable.
[2:38:43] I share free d.c.'s request of this committee and of dc
[2:38:47] council, which are listed in my written testimony.
[2:38:49] in order to establish trust with our communities, mpd must stop
[2:38:53] collaborating with federal agents and be held accountable
[2:38:55] for the harm it has inflicted in the past year.
[2:38:59] thank you. >> thank you very much.
[2:39:01] thank you all for being here today for your testimony.
[2:39:04] we appreciate it. Natalia otero.
[2:39:12] nee nee taylor. Dr. Taylor.
[2:39:17] shanice bailey. Commissioner trupti patel.
[2:39:30] and it is ok for this one, but for future panels, if we can sit
[2:39:34] in the order I called you. It is ok for this one.
[2:39:39] go ahead, it's all right. I'm just saying for future
[2:39:42] panels. It will help us keep track of
[2:39:44] everyone's testimony. We will begin with natalia
[2:39:49] otero, executive director and cofounder of d.c. Safe.
[2:39:50] >> thank you. My name is natalia otero and I
[2:39:56] am here on behalf of d.c. Safe. D.c. Safe has served the
[2:39:58] district for over 20 years this october.
[2:40:01] we have served almost 100,000 clients and I have been here
[2:40:05] since the very beginning. I speak today in my role as an
[2:40:10] advocate executive director and a member of our broader
[2:40:13] community. I want to focus my testimony
[2:40:15] today on the needs of the immigrant survivors.
[2:40:17] you will hear my colleague jenae wilsen today about broader
[2:40:20] oversight. I want to express my great
[2:40:23] concern for mpd's continuing cooperation with ice.
[2:40:26] we recognize the challenges the district faces with federal
[2:40:30] interference in critical aspects of home rule but we must
[2:40:35] acknowledge the toll it has taken on victims of domestic
[2:40:38] violence. We have seen fewer survivors
[2:40:39] coming forward. I am hearing from our community
[2:40:42] of providers that mpd cooperation has been
[2:40:51] increasingly challenging. That is unfair and not aligned
[2:40:53] with the stated values for victims to be further isolated,
[2:40:57] trapped, and to endure escalating violence.
[2:41:00] I ask you to consider how the dc council can guide the deputy
[2:41:04] mayor for public safety and the police department to be more
[2:41:06] clear with the community about how they intend to support and
[2:41:13] treat victims of violence. I would appreciate that question
[2:41:15] being asked of the new chief today.
[2:41:18] this political conversation has a big toll not just for the
[2:41:22] populations most directly affected, but for trust in law
[2:41:26] enforcement as a whole. The conversation isn't about
[2:41:30] legalities and a citizenship status.
[2:41:32] the conversation is really about how society and tends to treat
[2:41:35] each other. It is about humanity, dignity,
[2:41:38] and collective rights to the most basic freedoms and respect.
[2:41:43] having participated and listened to testimony related to mpd's
[2:41:47] performance for many years, and having maintained a successful
[2:41:50] relationship with them for 15 years, we strongly believe this
[2:41:54] has benefited survivors in the district as a whole.
[2:41:56] we must fiercely guard against any approach that dissolves the
[2:42:00] vital games that have been made over the years.
[2:42:03] the fear and isolation that this type of policing creates
[2:42:07] increases the risks for survivors and their children.
[2:42:10] as I mentioned in testimony to criminal justice council this
[2:42:14] morning, there is already a deficit to trust for survivors
[2:42:18] in the criminal justice system as a whole and for their
[2:42:20] barriers do nothing to move the needle in addressing domestic
[2:42:24] violence or creating safety for them.
[2:42:26] what kind of future are we creating for ourselves when
[2:42:28] these children live through violence, isolation, and
[2:42:31] experience visceral fear of reaching out to those who should
[2:42:34] be entrusted with safety of their communities?
[2:42:37] I testified at p.m. Ps -- dmpsj hearings and heard the response
[2:42:45] to having federal agents in the community.
[2:42:47] it was interesting and encouraging, but even after
[2:42:50] attending the hearing and working closely with mpd, I
[2:42:53] still have little clarity on how to speak to our clients about
[2:42:58] what to expect from mpd. For the first time in my 20 year
[2:43:01] tenure, I cannot assure them they will be protected.
[2:43:02] >> thank you very much. Dr. Nee nee taylor, executive
[2:43:09] director from harriet's wildest dreams.
[2:43:12] >> good morning. My name is nee nee taylor.
[2:43:17] I am the executive director for harriet's dreams and the
[2:43:21] cofounder of free d.c. For full transparency, I don't
[2:43:24] want to be here today. It is my duty and commitment for
[2:43:27] those who came before me to keep hope alive and continue to fight
[2:43:30] to free d.c.. I am testifying today in the
[2:43:33] spirit of my entity, the first black senator councilwoman, and
[2:43:37] my mayor for life marion barry, who gave me my first job here in
[2:43:40] d.c.. They were freedom
[2:43:44] fighters and I will continue the fight.
[2:43:45] d.c. Still is not free. We are being enslaved by this
[2:43:49] president and republican government.
[2:43:50] I ask this council rise up on the shoulders of those who came
[2:43:54] before them and fight for d.c. D.c. Is under attack and you all
[2:43:58] have tried to reason with the people on the hill, and it has
[2:44:02] been proven that when we give them an inch, they take a foot.
[2:44:05] it is past time that you all stop being complicit
[2:44:10] in protect your constituents. The government has contributed
[2:44:12] to the hurt and harm that is being done to the black and
[2:44:17] brown people in washington d c. Mpd is the leader of the task
[2:44:23] force. This legislation has emboldened
[2:44:26] the white supremacy law enforcement agencies to have
[2:44:27] their way in d.c. Without any accountability.
[2:44:30] others lift up their names in incidents where mpd has not kept
[2:44:34] our community members safe. I for one understand that mpd
[2:44:38] has a legal responsibility to work with federal agents.
[2:44:40] yet in this capacity that they are working now, it is a no.
[2:44:45] when a u.s. Marshal can respond to a local police call and shoot
[2:44:49] a constituent 10 times and mpd is not on the scene, that is
[2:44:53] very problematic and unacceptable.
[2:44:56] julian bailey's blood is on all of your hands.
[2:45:04] our board is here today so you can see firsthand what they are
[2:45:07] going through. On mlk day I had to kidnap a
[2:45:10] 16-year-old girl back from u.s. Marshals.
[2:45:13] they had her in handcuffs and were trying to lock her up for
[2:45:16] the actions of a 36-year-old man who was grooming her.
[2:45:19] they arrested the man, but because it was federal law
[2:45:23] enforcement, I was unable to get the man's last name, nor could I
[2:45:27] track him through court watch d.c. Of his criminal background
[2:45:30] or what was happening because it was in federal court.
[2:45:35] with what I am saying today, we must fight for change.
[2:45:39] I ask that the council vote for emergency legislation, that
[2:45:48] would keep your constituents safe.
[2:45:51] the only thing changing around mpd and local policing is the
[2:45:55] year. They are still killing black
[2:45:56] people. I've had my personal experience
[2:45:59] with jeffrey -- jeffery carroll.
[2:46:07] we shut down the inauguration. Carol was on the dust was a
[2:46:11] commander then and was listed in the federal case where all of us
[2:46:15] was found not guilty. I urge you all to say with your
[2:46:19] chest and do not make police officer jeffrey carroll the
[2:46:29] new police chief thank you. >> thank you.
[2:46:33] trinity's bailey. Welcome.
[2:46:34] >> good morning. My name is trenice bailey.
[2:46:42] on february 11, my life changed forever.
[2:46:44] my husband of 12 years was shot and killed by u.s. Marshal.
[2:46:48] my husband was shot and killed. Let me say it again.
[2:46:58] my husband was shot and killed. My husband of 12 years.
[2:47:03] by u.s. Marshal. Julian berry was just 43 at the
[2:47:10] time he was killed. He was a father of five children
[2:47:16] , ages 25, 21, a set of nine-year-old twins, and a
[2:47:22] five-year-old. As well as a stepfather to my
[2:47:26] two older children, who are now 30 and 20 five.
[2:47:31] he was also heavily involved in his community.
[2:47:34] he was a cheer dad, a real cheer dad.
[2:47:38] we have videos of him going up there, being the only brave
[2:47:42] cheer dad to wear whatever the girls would put on him.
[2:47:51] she took his responsibility as cheer dad very seriously.
[2:47:54] he encouraged kids in the neighborhood to not go down
[2:47:56] paths that could cause them to disrupt their lives.
[2:47:59] he literally paid young boys in our neighborhood to help shovel
[2:48:02] out the community during the recent snowstorm, because they
[2:48:06] didn't come on our street. But all that doesn't matter,
[2:48:09] because he was killed by u.s. Marshals on february 11.
[2:48:16] why, you ask? That is what we have been
[2:48:20] collectively asking pam bondi, muriel bowser, the current mayor
[2:48:22] of d.c., and the current director of u.s. Marshals.
[2:48:28] why were u.s. Marshals involved? Julian was not a prisoner, nor
[2:48:34] did he have a warrant for his arrest.
[2:48:37] why does our government want -- why doesn't our government want
[2:48:42] to release more details? What are you hiding?
[2:48:46] if the marshals were a part of the joint task force, this is a
[2:48:53] further reason this needs to end now.
[2:48:55] u.s. Marshal czar not trained to conduct traffic stops or
[2:49:01] interact with innocent people. You are placing district
[2:49:04] residents at risk. How many more husbands?
[2:49:10] how many fathers and sons need to die before you do
[2:49:16] something? My children will never see their
[2:49:21] father done. I will never get to nestle in
[2:49:23] his arms again. I will never get to hear him say
[2:49:27] my name because he spoke proudly .
[2:49:30] we were a team. I literally became a widow and a
[2:49:38] single mother all in one day. Why?
[2:49:41] because you failed to keep us safe.
[2:49:43] you failed to keep my family safe and our community lost a
[2:49:47] good man. I had a reality check, and I'm
[2:49:50] sorry to take this time but I have to say this.
[2:49:54] we had a life together, we dreamed together.
[2:49:57] I have to explain to my five-year-old every morning
[2:50:00] since that day that her daddy is not coming back.
[2:50:05] she literally says, mommy, I miss daddy's heartbeat because
[2:50:11] he put her to sleep every night, because we worked full time but
[2:50:15] he was that type of man that we shared.
[2:50:20] there was no I am just going to be out here.
[2:50:24] my nine-year-old twin daughters said, mommy, who is going to
[2:50:29] check the boyfriends? Because daddy said he is going
[2:50:33] to check all of them. Who is going to walk her down
[2:50:36] the aisle? I have another daughter who she
[2:50:40] won't talk to me anymore. I say, are you ok?
[2:50:45] mommy, I don't know. She won't speak.
[2:50:48] she's not herself. She literally is about to be in
[2:50:51] the starring role as elsa in "frozen" in may and I am
[2:50:56] concerned she may not do it. She has been practicing for this
[2:51:00] play every single day, she and her dad singing "let it go," and
[2:51:04] I am scared that she is not going to do it.
[2:51:06] this hurts. It hurts.
[2:51:11] so, I want answers, because you guys don't have to face these
[2:51:15] girls. I do.
[2:51:19] and you guys can go to sleep at night.
[2:51:21] I can't. I'm tired but I can't sleep
[2:51:24] because my husband is not there with me.
[2:51:26] he was my protector. That's it.
[2:51:31] thank you. [applause]
[2:51:39] [crowd chanting] >> thank you so much, ms.
[2:51:53] bailey. Thank you for being here and
[2:51:58] sharing your story. I am so sorry about this
[2:52:01] unimaginable loss. Your husband sounds like an
[2:52:03] incredible man. And thank you for being here.
[2:52:05] and we are going to try to get as many answers as we can about
[2:52:10] what happened here and get to the bottom of this.
[2:52:12] thank you for being here and your courage.
[2:52:17] chair trupti patel. >> before I begin my testimony,
[2:52:23] I do want to take a moment and say ever so gently, I am so
[2:52:30] sorry. Good morning, chairperson pinto,
[2:52:36] members of the committee on judiciary and public safety.
[2:52:39] thank you for holding this performance oversight meeting so
[2:52:42] my comments may be entered into the official record.
[2:52:45] my name is trupti patel and I am a fourth term advisory
[2:52:49] neighborhood commissioner. I am the chairperson of anc
[2:52:54] 2a. I am also the longest-serving
[2:52:59] elected official who was also a tipped worker.
[2:53:01] I am the legacy of two suitcases and eight dollars.
[2:53:05] I am a proud immigrant kid. I am here to testify regarding
[2:53:08] the performance of metropolitan police department during 2025
[2:53:11] and 2026. I want to be clear on the
[2:53:17] outset, effective policing depends not only on enforcement
[2:53:19] but public trust, data integrity, and accountability.
[2:53:23] over the past year, these pillars have been seriously
[2:53:26] tested. First, crime data integrity.
[2:53:29] throughout 2025, serious concerns emerged regarding the
[2:53:32] accuracy and classification of mpd crime data.
[2:53:36] federal investigation and whistleblower disclosures it
[2:53:38] issued allegations that data was manipulated or misclassified to
[2:53:43] present a more favorable narrative.
[2:53:45] this contributed to leadership of people and severely
[2:53:49] undermined public confidence in the department's reporting.
[2:53:52] accurate crime data is not optional.
[2:53:54] it is the foundation of policymaking, resource
[2:53:57] allocation, and trust. Sorry, I lost my place.
[2:54:08] went residents believe numbers are unreliable, they lose faith
[2:54:11] not only in mpd but in the entire safety framework.
[2:54:15] second, civilian oversight and officer accountability.
[2:54:17] during this same period, the office of complete -- police
[2:54:22] complaints issued several complaint volumes involving mpd
[2:54:25] officers, including allegations of harassment, inappropriate
[2:54:29] conduct, and excessive force. While complaints alone do not
[2:54:32] establish wrongdoing, sustained increases .2 issues that demand
[2:54:38] oversight, transparency, and timely discipline where
[2:54:41] warranted. The committee must examine not
[2:54:45] just individual cases but whether mpd is meaningfully
[2:54:48] impotent look -- implementing recommendations and closing the
[2:54:51] loops between complaints, discipline, and policy reform.
[2:54:55] third, organizational culture and leadership.
[2:54:57] the events of 2025 expose deep concerns in internal culture,
[2:55:03] including whether officers and commanders felt pressure to
[2:55:06] report data in a particular way, or field -- feared retaliation
[2:55:10] for issuing concerns. A police department cannot
[2:55:14] function effectively when integrity is subordinated to
[2:55:17] optics. As mpd moves forward under the
[2:55:20] leadership, this committee must assess whether reforms are
[2:55:23] structural or merely cosmetic. Finally, community trust.
[2:55:27] public safety is the strongest when communities view police as
[2:55:31] legitimate partners, not unaccountable institutions.
[2:55:35] rebuilding trust will require transparency, honest data,
[2:55:40] independent audits, and consistent engagement,
[2:55:43] especially in communities most impacted by both crime and
[2:55:45] policing. I have just 30 more seconds.
[2:55:48] in closing, and urge the committee and the council to use
[2:55:51] this performance oversight process to demand for things.
[2:55:55] independent verification of crime data --
[2:55:56] >> I'm sorry. If everyone went 30 seconds
[2:56:01] over, we would be here four additional hours, and I will
[2:56:05] hear from everyone today. >> I did submit this for the
[2:56:08] record and we will have a resolution around this as well.
[2:56:11] >> thank you for being here. And ms. Bailey, I did just want
[2:56:15] to ask you, if I can, has there been any conversation or
[2:56:22] information provided to you from the u.s. Marshals service,
[2:56:24] status of investigation? Have they communicated with you
[2:56:27] at all? >> no one has called me.
[2:56:33] not mpd, not anyone. I don't know.
[2:56:36] I don't even know where my vehicle is.
[2:56:39] I have to rent a car every day. My husband was working, but his
[2:56:47] check is gone. They sent me his last paycheck
[2:56:49] already. We are waiting for the
[2:56:53] insurance, life insurance, but that hasn't went through yet.
[2:56:57] my job is trying to help me as much as they can, but I only
[2:57:01] work. It's like, what's happening?
[2:57:06] do you even know that my husband exists?
[2:57:09] I don't know what happened. >> ok.
[2:57:11] we are going to do everything we can to try to get to the bottom
[2:57:14] of this. Thank you.
[2:57:16] thank you all for being here. Robert vinson brannum.
[2:57:22] leah tribbett. Sam davis.
[2:57:25] jillian buford. Mr. Branham, if you can sit on
[2:57:34] this seat here on my right, and we will go in that order.
[2:57:37] leah tribbett next to him. Sam davis.
[2:57:51] robert vinson brannum, chairman of the ward 5 leadership council
[2:57:55] public safety committee. Welcome.
[2:58:05] >> greetings and salutations. I am robert vinson brannum.
[2:58:12] I am chairman of the ward 5 leadership council public safety
[2:58:16] committee, president emeritus of the d.c. Federation of civic
[2:58:20] associations, and a board member of the d.c. Open government
[2:58:23] coalition. I am also a former anc
[2:58:26] commissioner. Outside of advocating and being
[2:58:28] arrested for d.c. Statehood and for the rest -- right of women
[2:58:32] to make their own health decisions, public safety has
[2:58:35] been and remains a priority issue for me.
[2:58:38] I have been a victim of crime and walked the streets of d.c.
[2:58:42] with my bloomingdale neighbors to take back the streets.
[2:58:51] you don't -- I don't take a backseat to anyone.
[2:58:55] I've testified in support of mpd, but yesterday president
[2:58:59] trump gave a state of the union address and lied to the american
[2:59:02] people. If I were to present a state of
[2:59:07] public safety in the sea at this time, I cannot tell a lie and
[2:59:10] declare all is well. Yes, crime is down, but not to
[2:59:14] president trump. It is also down trust for mpd.
[2:59:20] the people have lost trust in mpd because of the ride along
[2:59:26] with the inhumane, unconstitutional, and racist
[2:59:30] immigration policies of president trump, d.h. Secretary
[2:59:32] kristi noem, and white house advisor stephen miller.
[2:59:38] the decision to transport to federal agents to terrorize
[2:59:41] people is unconscionable. The decision not to be
[2:59:44] transparent about the level of joint mpd and ice operations has
[2:59:49] had dramatic negative impacts in d.c. Communities where it is
[2:59:53] vital for public safety. In a surprise letter to me on
[2:59:59] d.c. Law and order, president trump attacked your leadership
[3:00:03] and other members leadership in the city, and the people in the
[3:00:07] district of columbia. During a meeting requested by
[3:00:09] the white house with me this past august, I expressed my
[3:00:14] strong opposition to the president's federalization of
[3:00:17] mpd and activation of the national guard.
[3:00:20] I have challenged u.s. Attorney jeanine pirro's assertion
[3:00:28] that this is the crime capital of the nation.
[3:00:31] mpd has been sacrificed and lost in a political play to keep a
[3:00:34] presidential bully and mag a congressional republicans
[3:00:47] at play. People are willing to pay the
[3:00:49] ultimate sacrifice. I am somebody.
[3:00:52] I am somebody. For edc, for edc
[3:00:55] --free d.c. I would like to submit the
[3:01:01] letter signed by your president, because he isn't mine, that lies
[3:01:06] about d.c. And crime. Thank you.
[3:01:09] >> thank you, mr. Brannum. Leah tribbett, public witness.
[3:01:15] >> good afternoon. My name is leah tribbett and I
[3:01:20] am a resident of ward 1 and anc1 b.
[3:01:25] I also taught middle school for over 10 years, which is honestly
[3:01:28] really relevant to this hearing. In my seventh graders
[3:01:31] encountered something they didn't know, they used every
[3:01:33] method to find out more. When they witnessed something
[3:01:36] that wasn't morally right, they fought to make it right.
[3:01:40] yet for the past year and longer, all I have heard from
[3:01:42] the leaders of the city when it comes to public safety is, I
[3:01:46] don't know, and I can't do that, ask someone else.
[3:01:49] my smith graders would never accept those answers for
[3:01:51] themselves and I am at a loss as to why you think we should
[3:01:53] accept them from you. I think of the middle schoolers,
[3:01:56] all of our kids looking for a model of what a thriving
[3:01:59] community looks like, and instead seeing a counselor and
[3:02:02] police department that cares more about criminalizing them
[3:02:04] just for existing, covering up attempted murders, and executing
[3:02:07] our neighbors in the streets than they do about their actual
[3:02:10] jobs. We are seeing in interim chief
[3:02:12] who has openly protected white the premises.
[3:02:14] we are seeing officers collaborating with federal
[3:02:19] agents terrorizing the city. Your hearing mpd officers say in
[3:02:22] meetings that they automatically assume teenagers are criminals
[3:02:25] if they are outside at certain times and detain them without
[3:02:28] question. They are seeing mpd officers and
[3:02:30] leadership want that they don't care about the law and refused
[3:02:32] to be held accountable to it. Not that you have made any
[3:02:35] attempt to do so besides signing a single letter.
[3:02:37] I could sit here and share more stories that we have time for.
[3:02:41] about the officers I watched tackle a teenage boy to the
[3:02:44] ground because it was 10 minutes after curfew and he was still
[3:02:47] walking home come about officers who have openly violated the
[3:02:50] sanctuary values ask, by exploiting any loopholes they
[3:02:53] can to disappear neighbors, or arresting or harassing for
[3:03:00] filming. Nothing has changed and we don't
[3:03:02] have the time to keep playing these games when the mpd is
[3:03:05] murdering our neighbors without remorse or accountability.
[3:03:08] for every person who lives in d.c., your message is clear.
[3:03:11] you valuate your power over our lives and we are disposable to
[3:03:14] you. There are so many things I could
[3:03:16] demand that would protect us that I don't have time to name
[3:03:18] them all, but here are three, all of which are within your
[3:03:21] power. One, and mpd's participation in
[3:03:23] the safe and butyl task force. Two, fully comply with the task
[3:03:31] force. Three, hold mpd accountable for
[3:03:34] every broken law. All three of these are something
[3:03:36] that can be done within the district and are what we
[3:03:39] deserve. We deserve a city where we can
[3:03:41] exist without fear that mpd officers covering their badges
[3:03:44] will harass and attack us alongside masked an unidentified
[3:03:47] federal agents, where at best they will traumatize us and at
[3:03:50] worst they will execute us. If you actually care about d.c.,
[3:03:53] if you look at the city and see a community worth protecting and
[3:03:56] celebrating, you will listen to us.
[3:03:58] I said this in november at councilmember nadeau's
[3:04:01] roundtable. I said in december at your
[3:04:03] hearing pairing I am saying it again now.
[3:04:04] maybe this'll be the time you actually hear me.
[3:04:06] thank you. >> ok.
[3:04:11] sam davis. >> hello.
[3:04:17] >> are you sam davis? Or are you testifying for sam
[3:04:20] davis? What is your name?
[3:04:22] >> my name is nampa cooper. Hello.
[3:04:33] I live in ward 5. I am a youth leader on gun
[3:04:36] violence prevention in the district and I represent a
[3:04:39] project. I am deeply concerned about the
[3:04:41] safety of young people in d.c. Today, I'm going to talk about
[3:04:45] issues regarding you safety, safe spaces, and our proposed
[3:04:49] solutions. But first, I will tell you a
[3:04:51] story about what happens when you safety is not prioritized.
[3:04:54] the metro police department does not respond to our calls for
[3:04:56] help when we actually need them. One time, a stabbing happened at
[3:05:01] the train station. The police did not come and that
[3:05:04] person died. Tell me, is that safety?
[3:05:08] we believe funding community spaces is a better investment
[3:05:11] than over policing young people. D.c.'s current solution to youth
[3:05:14] violence is regulating their freedom in d.c..
[3:05:17] investment in safe spaces would look like it's of a curfew and
[3:05:21] federal agents patrolling, youth would be allowed to be
[3:05:23] themselves and nurture their interests.
[3:05:25] safe spaces are violence prevention.
[3:05:27] we have several things the city council can do to support youth.
[3:05:31] most urgently, we want you to create more opportunities for
[3:05:35] youth, especially youth in words seven and eight.
[3:05:37] want you to fund recreation centers as well as organizations
[3:05:41] advocating for youth safety. Make opportunities like the
[3:05:47] summer youth employment program continue year-round.
[3:05:53] and operate as an afterschool program.
[3:05:58] schedule do hearings around youth availability because youth
[3:06:01] should be active in the policymaking process.
[3:06:03] we invite you to come to our schools, or programs, and our
[3:06:07] neighborhoods to meet us. Hear our concerns and policy
[3:06:10] ideas. You cannot say you're being
[3:06:12] accountable to youth without meeting them first.
[3:06:15] >> thank. Jillian buford.
[3:06:18] >> good afternoon, chair pinto. My name is jillian buford, and I
[3:06:27] am a ward 8 resident and policy organizer at harriet's wildest
[3:06:31] dreams, centered on state sanctioned violence in the
[3:06:35] greater d.c. Area. I'm testifying today because I'm
[3:06:38] greatly concerned about mpds collaboration with law
[3:06:41] enforcement agencies. Over the past year, mpds
[3:06:44] cooperation with federal agencies has been more intense
[3:06:47] and aggressive than ever before. As evidenced by the over 1000
[3:06:51] police complaints received in the last year.
[3:06:54] this has set a dangerous precedent that must be addressed
[3:06:56] immediately. The trumpet ministry's and's
[3:06:58] forces have been brutalizing and killing people, including black
[3:07:01] folks right here in d.c.. They are following harmful
[3:07:05] folders -- orders, leaving families separated.
[3:07:09] this issue is important to me because I'm sick and tired of
[3:07:11] losing black to state sanctioned violence.
[3:07:13] on febrile 11, u.s. Marshals shot and killed 43-year-old
[3:07:17] julian -- julian bailey. The federal agents are not
[3:07:25] trained in community response in de-escalation.
[3:07:27] so, what happened? Where is bodycam footage?
[3:07:31] where's the accountability? Twhile I understand the council
[3:07:35] has no power over federal agencies, there are several
[3:07:38] actions the council can take and should take to enforce basic
[3:07:42] safety standards and limit how mpd assists in operations.
[3:07:45] I am coming with several demands.
[3:07:47] prohibit face coverings for federal officers, require
[3:07:50] several agents operating in d.c. To follow the same requirements
[3:07:53] for public identification as mpd, require mpd arrest reports
[3:08:00] list all officers involved in the arrest, prohibit
[3:08:03] mpd from correlating with federal agencies in locations
[3:08:06] such as schools, health care facilities, and organizations
[3:08:10] providing aid. Repeal local qualified immunity
[3:08:12] productions for local officers making arrests under d.c. Law,
[3:08:16] as well as any officer who enters a d.c. School, community
[3:08:18] center, or house of worship. Require mpd to submit a report
[3:08:23] on any interactions they have with a minor, including
[3:08:25] conversations on the street. Conduct all independent
[3:08:29] investigation of all officer-involved shooting's in
[3:08:32] 2025 and 2026 and release the names and bodycam footage of all
[3:08:35] officers involved. Restrict vehicular pursuits.
[3:08:38] close the loophole in the sanctuary values act so it
[3:08:41] applies to all d.c. Agencies that contact residents outside
[3:08:45] of holding them in custody. Hold a hearing on the safe
[3:08:47] community police -- safe community act of 2025.
[3:08:53] prohibit mpd from contacting federal agents over personal
[3:08:57] possession of cannabis. But also in addition to these
[3:09:00] demands, I am urging the council to reject the appointment of
[3:09:03] jeffery carroll as a permanent mpd chief.
[3:09:05] not only has a cost the city money with lawsuits, he has been
[3:09:10] documented standing alongside proud boys on january 6.
[3:09:12] is this who you trust to keep us safe?
[3:09:14] he has already proven to be a liability.
[3:09:17] d.c. Residents are doing our part to keep each other safe
[3:09:20] from the militarized police in our communities.
[3:09:22] I am here today to demand you do your part.
[3:09:24] thank you for your time. >> thank you.
[3:09:27] thank you all very much for being here.
[3:09:29] >> very quickly, I recommend that this committee send a
[3:09:37] letter to u.s. Attorney jeanine pirro and invite her to come
[3:09:41] here and testify before this council and the people of the
[3:09:44] district of columbia and stop hiding behind social media
[3:09:46] posts. >> thank you.
[3:09:51] april goggans. Carlo chavarria.
[3:09:56] mikki charles. Loreal hawk.
[3:10:04] if you would mind sitting in this chair and we will go in
[3:10:06] order this way to make sure everyone's testimony is tracked
[3:10:10] with their name. That would be great.
[3:10:13] april carlo. Mikki charles.
[3:10:19] is mikki charles here? Mikki charles not here?
[3:10:28] loreal hawk. Arianna mackey.
[3:10:37] mackie, thank you. We will begin with april
[3:10:45] goggans. >> my name is april goggans and
[3:10:58] I represent blm d.c., and I've been a proud ward 8 resident for
[3:11:02] almost half my life. This performance oversight
[3:11:05] hearing is on mpd, so let's talk about performance.
[3:11:10] let's imagine hypothetically that mpd performed exactly
[3:11:15] as it was built to and murdering me today.
[3:11:20] not a rogue officer, not a tragic mistake, but the logical
[3:11:23] outcome -- are you listening? No, I'm just making sure brooke
[3:11:31] -- she was a little busy. But the logical outcome of
[3:11:35] policy, budget, and political protection.
[3:11:38] since 2001, mpd has operated with expanded federal patrol
[3:11:41] authorities. Since 2000 six, it expanded cctv
[3:11:45] surveillance. Since 2008, shot spotters
[3:11:51] blanketed black neighborhoods. Since 2012, escalated
[3:11:55] enforcement. Since 2018 project safe
[3:11:58] neighborhoods layered coordination.
[3:12:03] federal gun strike forces have wreaked havoc on our city.
[3:12:07] since 2022, flat cameras and expanded license plate readers.
[3:12:12] since 2024, a real-time crime integrating surveillance and
[3:12:17] federal databases. Through it all, mpd's budget has
[3:12:19] grown every year, every request, every expansion approved.
[3:12:23] even when the violence grew, that is mpds performance.
[3:12:26] now imagine the confrontation shaped by that performance.
[3:12:29] if mpd did what it was designed to do and what councilmember
[3:12:33] pinto fights for, the officer who killed me would be deemed
[3:12:35] justified. He would have followed policy,
[3:12:39] placed on paid administrative leave.
[3:12:40] the maga fanatic police chair would defend him.
[3:12:45] the mayor would defend mpd. The council would say they are
[3:12:49] waiting for investigation, but say nothing to my parents or my
[3:12:52] daughter. And mpd would investigate mpd
[3:12:53] because that is the pattern. If there were a vigil for me,
[3:12:57] some of the same councilmembers who voted to expand mpd's power
[3:13:00] would get on the mic and cry. They would mourn me publicly
[3:13:05] while continuing to fund the system that made my death
[3:13:07] possible. They would call for calm and
[3:13:11] pass another enforcement bill because the point is not safety.
[3:13:14] the point is about preservation of the institution.
[3:13:17] mpd's culture would activate. The character assassination
[3:13:19] would begin. She was anti-police, radical,
[3:13:22] unstable. They would dissect my life like
[3:13:25] evidence. They would say I was a single
[3:13:27] mother, as if that makes me disposable.
[3:13:30] they would say I survived abuse as a surviving -- as if
[3:13:34] surviving abuse makes me violent.
[3:13:37] they would weaponize my humanity.
[3:13:39] they would turn my resilience into suspicion, my survival into
[3:13:44] pathology, my truth into justification for my death, not
[3:13:48] to understand me but to make what happened to me feel
[3:13:51] reasonable. Not to key minima -- not to
[3:13:53] humanize me but to make me suspicious, to imply I was
[3:13:57] responsible. That is not reform or failure,
[3:14:00] that is designed. White's a promise he does not
[3:14:02] require open slurs. It requires expanding budgets
[3:14:05] regardless of harm. Once the smoke clears, it is
[3:14:12] back to secure d.c., back to expanded detention.
[3:14:15] >> thank you. >> carlo chavarria, public
[3:14:20] witness. >> thank you, chairwoman pinto,
[3:14:29] and members of the committee. My name is carlo chavarria, and
[3:14:35] I am a resident of ward 4. I am a longtime organizer who
[3:14:37] has been active in various community roles in the last year
[3:14:41] and over the last nine years alone.
[3:14:43] I am here to testify on the impact of mpd's cooperation with
[3:14:47] federal law enforcement, how it is echoing america's history of
[3:14:51] race coded fascism. Over the last six months, the
[3:14:53] safe and beautiful task force has been occupying force in this
[3:14:58] city. They abuse their authority to
[3:15:00] terrorize in at least five cases kill d.c. Residents, and
[3:15:06] in response to congresswoman crawford's point from earlier,
[3:15:08] their presence has been a deterrent to d.c. Safety, not an
[3:15:13] enforcement. Living in petworth, I have seen
[3:15:15] the neighborhood become a staging ground for mass
[3:15:17] profiling of black and brown people.
[3:15:20] the intersections of georgia avenue were once safe spaces for
[3:15:23] the unhoused. Now they can't safely receive
[3:15:26] community or city wide support. Apartment buildings are
[3:15:29] regularly targeted in raids and other federal sweeps with
[3:15:34] mpd officers actively on-site. Sometimes they will say they are
[3:15:37] responding to a call. Other times they won't respond
[3:15:40] at all. Just working within the
[3:15:43] anonymity of the federal government.
[3:15:45] I have seen everyone from hospitality workers to
[3:15:51] ride-share drivers to my own neighbors watch out for the
[3:15:53] black man's with out-of-state plates regularly sticking out
[3:15:59] intersections, waiting for people to make the
[3:16:01] wrong turn. Yet marielle bowser and
[3:16:04] leadership supports their presence, claiming the streets
[3:16:07] are safer because they are a deterrent to violent crime.
[3:16:10] but that logic -- by that logic, all residents are potential
[3:16:15] criminals, another scapegoat for the success of these fascists.
[3:16:17] for all the limitations on d.c. Self-governance, there are
[3:16:21] several actionable steps you and dc council can and should take
[3:16:24] to enforce basic safety. They will be submitted on the
[3:16:28] record as many have already spoken on these 11 points.
[3:16:32] I would like to highlight the ones that enforce the will of
[3:16:35] the people and the laws that you will have passed, specifically
[3:16:40] points eight through 11. Restricting vehicular pursuits
[3:16:42] for all federal agencies, closing the loophole in the
[3:16:46] sanctuary values act, holding hearings on the safe community
[3:16:50] places and policing amendment act of 2020 five, and
[3:16:54] prohibiting mpd from contacting federal agents over personal
[3:16:57] possession of cannabis. Lastly, as we discuss how white
[3:17:01] supremacy is shaping law enforcement, I call on you to
[3:17:04] oppose the appointment of jeffery carroll as permanent mpd
[3:17:07] chief. Not only has he enabled
[3:17:10] harassment of female officers, he is a known sympathizer to
[3:17:14] white supremacists with documented accounts of him
[3:17:17] collaborating with the proud boys and other hate groups.
[3:17:19] I know we all care about d.c. Sovereignty and safety.
[3:17:22] I ask you to act on it as you have claimed.
[3:17:26] thank you very much. End the occupation.
[3:17:28] >> thank you. Loreal hawk, civil rights
[3:17:34] attorney, erase the database d.c.
[3:17:34] >> my name is loreal hawk and I am testifying as a ward 3
[3:17:41] resident, civil rights attorney, and founder of the erase the
[3:17:43] database d.c. Coalition. We were founded in 2021 and the
[3:17:48] mission is to abolish racist surveillance technologies and
[3:17:51] the racist surveillance state. We do this by advocacy and
[3:17:55] organizing to abolish discriminatory policies and
[3:17:57] technologies used to perfect rice's outcomes.
[3:18:00] we also build community power and demand transformative
[3:18:03] systems of care instead of useless experimental and
[3:18:06] expensive surveillance technologies.
[3:18:07] from cctv, red light camera come out to the usage of
[3:18:12] celebrite entanglements, it is important
[3:18:19] to know that they did not disclose any of the technologies
[3:18:23] I just listed. All of this tech converges into
[3:18:26] specific policies, like the database created in, or the
[3:18:30] real-time crime center that went live in 2024.
[3:18:32] when mpd wants to compile info on someone, they use devices to
[3:18:36] track movements. When they make a search or
[3:18:38] arrest based on vague assumption of gang affiliation, they may
[3:18:41] use celebrite to search a person's phone within minutes.
[3:18:47] if they decide to monitor a resident to the real-time crime
[3:18:51] center or the d.c. Gang database, every public or
[3:18:53] private camera in the city may be for use by mpd to track their
[3:18:58] movements. Collectively, mpd is empowered
[3:19:00] to know everything about a person with or without a
[3:19:03] warrant. They use this information to
[3:19:05] surveilled, harassed, and create pretext for arrest, like
[3:19:08] labeling someone a gang member by seeing them attract with
[3:19:10] their gang members. In essence, walking while black
[3:19:13] or brown became automated. Mpd is willing to spend millions
[3:19:16] on this type of technology. In fact, mpd wants to spend an
[3:19:20] additional $5 million alone on additional cameras.
[3:19:24] how taxpayer dollars should not be spent on the list technology.
[3:19:27] our dollars should not be spent on experiments all an extensive
[3:19:30] technologies that share obscene amounts of info with law
[3:19:34] enforcement. Mpd already regularly share
[3:19:35] information with more than 30 federal agencies before the
[3:19:38] occupation. Since the occupation began,
[3:19:41] there has been an increase in 24 arrests per day, as told and
[3:19:44] observed by d.c. Court watch. Of those arrested, 86% were
[3:19:49] black, which is more than double the opposition of black d.c.
[3:19:54] residents. Council has worked to create
[3:20:00] responses like the crisis response team, crt, and champs,
[3:20:04] but these services are not enough.
[3:20:05] less than 1% of 911 calls are divided -- diverted.
[3:20:08] in some spending money on flock, cellebrite, or other
[3:20:14] technologies, we should be focusing on implement e-models
[3:20:17] like on point and scaling up crt and champs.
[3:20:21] on point provides free mental health services, drug treatment,
[3:20:25] meals, laundry services, and other services to meet
[3:20:27] residents' needs. They were able to intervene in
[3:20:33] over 700 overdoses. This is the type of service we
[3:20:35] should invest in to protect our citizens, not extensive machine
[3:20:38] learning that can develop a complete dossier of residents
[3:20:41] within seconds. Thank you.
[3:20:42] >> thank you. Arianna mackey, erase the gang
[3:20:47] database d.c. >> chairperson pinto and members
[3:20:51] of the judiciary, I have been here before representing a
[3:20:56] client whose son was murdered by mpd without accountability.
[3:21:00] my name is arianna mackey and I live in ward 6.
[3:21:03] today, I am testifying as a georgetown law student and
[3:21:05] represented up a the database d.c.
[3:21:10] -- erase the database d.c. I am worried about the harm and
[3:21:15] abuse enacted by the metro police department's continued
[3:21:18] cooperation with federal law enforcement agencies and the
[3:21:19] reliance on the gang database. I am urging the council to
[3:21:23] prohibit federal law enforcement from working with mpd on
[3:21:29] covering their faces and force them to adhere to existing laws
[3:21:32] and public identification. To require that all officers
[3:21:36] from all agencies on the scene of an mpd arrest be listed by
[3:21:39] name and badge number and arrest reports.
[3:21:43] to prohibit mpd from coordinating with federal agents
[3:21:46] in sensitive locations like schools, health care facilities,
[3:21:51] and organizations providing aid, and to prohibit mpd and other
[3:21:55] local and federal law enforcement agencies from using
[3:21:57] d.c.'s vague and discriminatory gang database good as my
[3:22:01] colleague mentioned, mpd maintains a gang database of
[3:22:04] individuals with ties that mpd has considered gang ties.
[3:22:09] mpd can add anyone to it. If they observe an individual
[3:22:15] associating with assumed gang members.
[3:22:17] mpd can conclude a person is a gang member based on tattoos,
[3:22:20] clothing, the public housing they live in, or
[3:22:27] affiliations. Mpd is collecting personal
[3:22:28] information from a large number of people who are likely not
[3:22:31] gang members. Less than half of d.c.'s
[3:22:35] population is black, but 80% of the people in the database are
[3:22:39] listed as black. Only one individual is listed in
[3:22:41] the database as white as of 20. This omits white
[3:22:47] supremacist groups and others. 90 percent are named after
[3:22:51] street corners and public housing complex.
[3:22:55] this is used to justify aggressive policing in our
[3:22:57] community. Mpd does not even a form --
[3:23:01] inform people they are in the database, nor of a have a
[3:23:05] process to appeal ones included in it.
[3:23:07] the best I can tell the council, again, be passed legislation,
[3:23:12] dismantling the database, and prohibiting government
[3:23:15] surveillance strictly on personal association or
[3:23:16] protected classes in accordance with the d.c. Human rights act.
[3:23:20] as a resident of ward 6, I walk outside every day and see
[3:23:27] my neighbors struggling in the freezing weather.
[3:23:28] their needs remain unmet at the presence of law enforcement
[3:23:31] increases and fails to help the community.
[3:23:34] council members, will you take a stand for the residents of the
[3:23:39] district? I hope so.
[3:23:41] thank you. Chair pinto: thank you.
[3:23:45] thank you all for your testimony.
[3:23:48] we will be asking interim chief to carol -- interim chief caroll
[3:23:57] about these databases. Thank you.
[3:23:59] oliver merino, merawi gerima, and, ms. Gerima, if you can sit
[3:24:14] on this seat, we will go in this order.
[3:24:18] james stroud, chad oliver. Great.
[3:24:25] we will begin with oliver merino, public witness.
[3:24:27] all of thank you. Good morning.
[3:24:30] my name is oliver. I'm here with the coalition,
[3:24:35] thank you for being here, everyone.
[3:24:38] this is, of course, not the first time that we are here.
[3:24:43] for months, we have called on the dc council to hold the
[3:24:48] metropolitan police department accountable, to convene a
[3:24:50] dedicated hearing about this voluntary collaboration with
[3:24:54] federal officers, to demand that our local laws are respected and
[3:25:01] upheld, and yet nothing meaningful has been done.
[3:25:06] the mpd voluntary collaboration with I.c.e., cbp, u.s. Marshal,
[3:25:11] park police, dea, fbi have violated people's civil rights,
[3:25:17] have further criminalized our community, have led to racial
[3:25:19] profiling, and these federal agents have even shot and killed
[3:25:25] our community members. All of this collaboration has
[3:25:27] happened and has happened willingly, openly, and without
[3:25:31] any type of accountability. This is not about safety.
[3:25:34] this is about placating a xenophobic federal
[3:25:39] administration. Enough is enough.
[3:25:39] we are demanding the end of this collaboration once again fit our
[3:25:44] taxes should not be going to continue this collaboration.
[3:25:48] invest in community, not federal collaboration that tears
[3:25:51] families apart and puts our communities at risk.
[3:25:54] no more money to abduct our immigrant neighbors, no more
[3:25:59] money to protect federal agents that shoot first and ask
[3:26:02] questions later. No more money for coverups.
[3:26:05] the council has oversight over mpd.
[3:26:10] there must be accountability of the harm that has already been
[3:26:12] committed. There must be certainty about
[3:26:16] how this collaboration has worked and continues to happen,
[3:26:18] and there must be action from the council.
[3:26:20] it's not enough to ask questions.
[3:26:23] you have to lead, you have to take action.
[3:26:27] besides the council's budget oversight power, you can
[3:26:31] introduce and pass emergency legislation that specifically
[3:26:35] prevents mpd from collaborating with immigration enforcement and
[3:26:39] assisting federal agents that terrorize our community.
[3:26:42] how are you preparing to protect our immigrant neighbors?
[3:26:46] what are you doing now to prevent more harm in the future?
[3:26:51] we need emergency organization. We needed it six months ago.
[3:26:55] it's not too late to do the right thing.
[3:26:57] thank you. [applause]
[3:26:58] chair pinto: thank you. Dt alliance against some --
[3:27:14] merawi gerima, organizer of d.c. Alliance against racist and
[3:27:15] political repression. >> thank you.
[3:27:19] we heard about how her husband was murdered by u.s. Marshals,
[3:27:23] and you sat there and told her you would get to the bottom of
[3:27:26] it, which is quite upsetting to me, because philip brown was
[3:27:29] shot at by homeland security officers back in october.
[3:27:34] since then, we've been coming ?o every hearing possible to raise
[3:27:39] the case of brown and justin, who was also shot at by homeland
[3:27:43] security officers. And since then, no legislation
[3:27:47] have been introduced by you to limit the activity of these
[3:27:52] federal agents, and we say that had you acted with haste back
[3:27:58] then, we believe that julian baily's beads life may have been
[3:28:03] spared by the racist officers and agents who are running
[3:28:06] through our city, unchecked by the city council and the mayor.
[3:28:12] that is the first thing. When you say get to the bottom
[3:28:15] of it, you know, I'm not sure exactly what that even means,
[3:28:21] because you seem up to this point to the lonely been willing
[3:28:25] or able to send questionnaires to mpd, just so they can throw
[3:28:29] them back in your face, unanswered.
[3:28:31] we want justice. We are not saying we want only
[3:28:35] the information on who did it. We do.
[3:28:40] we want justice, you know, and here at the d.c. Alliance, all
[3:28:47] of us, phillip brown's murder, for bailey's murder as well, we
[3:28:55] want them charge, we want them locked up.
[3:28:58] killer cops should be locked up. They cannot come into our city
[3:29:01] and break d.c. Laws. They are not above the law.
[3:29:08] I was in chicago when they passed I.c.e. On notice and the
[3:29:12] executive order, mandating cbd investigate federal agents that
[3:29:18] break chicago law. We want to make d.c. A place
[3:29:22] where these racist agents are afraid to break our laws.
[3:29:25] that's what we want. And we are not afraid of
[3:29:30] retaliation by trump. He's already attacking us, you
[3:29:32] know. This was fought for and won by
[3:29:36] the movement and will be defended by exactly the same
[3:29:38] thing. It won't be you and whoever else
[3:29:41] will do it. That's what here in the d.c.
[3:29:45] alliance, we fight and will build a movement to get through
[3:29:50] the police here in washington, d.c., because we see day after
[3:29:52] day elected officials who will not raise a finger to defend the
[3:29:54] people of this city, and we want that democratic option.
[3:30:00] take that power to the city council in the mayor and put it
[3:30:02] in the hands of the people to give them a way to hold these
[3:30:05] cops accountable when they kill our people.
[3:30:07] thank you. [applause]
[3:30:08] chair pinto: thank you. James stroud, public witness.
[3:30:16] james: I'm james stroud, and I've been a resident for almost
[3:30:20] four years, and I've lived in the d.c. Area for over eight
[3:30:23] years. I'm a statistician at fema.
[3:30:25] I previously worked at the johns hopkins university, and hold
[3:30:31] degrees in statistics from john hopkins university.
[3:30:33] starting in 2018, mpd has released their police stop data,
[3:30:36] a record of each individual stop.
[3:30:39] this data is a very basic form of accountability and
[3:30:42] transparency for mpd, which is especially important now when we
[3:30:45] seen a huge shift in how mpd offerings with his cooperation
[3:30:49] -- operates with I.c.e. And others.
[3:30:58] mpd has not released any stop data from 2025, which is a
[3:31:01] violation of the act which requires biannual publication of
[3:31:04] this data. It is impossible to capture the
[3:31:08] full impact of mpd's cooperation with I.c.e. And other entities
[3:31:11] without this crucial data. Before I dig into the 2024 data,
[3:31:15] I want to point out that the's population is about 2% black and
[3:31:18] 38% white. In 2024 -- 42% black and 38%
[3:31:23] white. In 2024, 9% of the stops were
[3:31:28] white people. So two populations are about the
[3:31:30] same size, yet one is stopped by the police over eight times more
[3:31:33] than the other. Let's look at stops where there
[3:31:36] no arrests, no ticket, or no warning given.
[3:31:47] the clearest cases of a person doing absolutely nothing wrong
[3:31:48] for black people, bees are one in four stops.
[3:31:49] for white people, that number is one in eight.
[3:31:52] they do wrong much less often but are stopped over eight times
[3:31:56] as often? This is a clear case of
[3:31:57] discrimination. The aclu of d.c. Has public
[3:32:02] reports of similar numbers for 2019, 2020, and 2023.
[3:32:06] these stops are not just a minor inconvenience.
[3:32:10] they result in harm. Black people are
[3:32:11] disproportionately the victims of police use of force and
[3:32:14] police killings and they erode the public's trust in the
[3:32:15] police. They ensure that people don't
[3:32:19] trust the police, are less likely to report a crime and
[3:32:22] they themselves are the victims. I want to finish by telling a
[3:32:25] story about new york city. Between 2004 and 2012, 80% of
[3:32:29] the police stops where the black and latino people who only made
[3:32:32] up half of their population. Sound familiar?
[3:32:36] in 2013, a judge ruled that nypd's stop and frisk policy is
[3:32:41] unconstitutional. The ruling resulted in a huge
[3:32:44] decrease in the number of police stops, from hundreds of
[3:32:47] thousands of stops year to 12,000 a year.
[3:32:49] with that change, crime only decrease from previous
[3:32:54] years. In 2024, mpd stopped over 73,000
[3:32:56] people. Meanwhile, nypd only stopped
[3:33:00] 25,000 people. Why are the police in a city of
[3:33:05] 700 pounds and stopping more people than a city of over 8
[3:33:09] million? Mpd needs to publish its 2025
[3:33:14] stop data immediately. If this is too cumbersome to do
[3:33:16] in a timely manner, maybe they should not be stopping three
[3:33:19] times more people than nypd does.
[3:33:20] [applause] chair pinto: thank you, mr.
[3:33:23] stroud. Chad oliver, public witness.
[3:33:28] chad: good afternoon, chairman. My name is chad oliver, and I
[3:33:32] live in ward 4. I'm here today as an organizer
[3:33:35] with dsa and the families not fed coalition.
[3:33:42] before interim chief of police carroll comes up and begins to
[3:33:45] distort the truth, I would like to provide you with your reality
[3:33:48] of what is going on in this city from the perspective of a person
[3:33:50] who lives in one of the communities being terrorized by
[3:33:54] federal agents and the mpd. On an evening sometime close to
[3:33:59] the -- close to christmas, I received an alert that federal
[3:34:02] agents and mpd were harassing a neighbor not far from my home.
[3:34:03] when I arrived at the same, I met five federal agents forming
[3:34:10] a perimeter around several mpd officers who were harassing
[3:34:12] unhoused woman for having an open container.
[3:34:16] this woman was ultimately detained.
[3:34:20] this was not an isolated incident.
[3:34:22] many of us in the community have experience freezing days and
[3:34:26] nights, and an uptick in unhoused neighbors being
[3:34:29] harassed by federal agents and retained for -- attained for
[3:34:35] minor offenses. These individuals are vulnerable
[3:34:37] to this cruel treatment. Mpd will tell you this is simply
[3:34:41] about reducing crime in the city and making america safe again,
[3:34:44] but those of us that are watching the streets every day
[3:34:47] know that this is a lie. It is simply about meeting
[3:34:54] quotas. When the federal agents can't
[3:34:55] target our immigrant neighbors, they prey on whoever is
[3:34:56] available when they are most vulnerable.
[3:34:57] it is about desensitizing masses and armed federal forces in
[3:35:02] those cities. As the community defense
[3:35:05] organizer in this moment, I am asked, why aren't we doing what
[3:35:09] minneapolis is doing? Why aren't our leaders acting
[3:35:12] like those in chicago or los angeles?
[3:35:15] I must constantly remind them that this is d.c..
[3:35:18] the conditions are very different here.
[3:35:19] we are not a state. But now I'm asking myself, why
[3:35:25] do I feel the need to explain our leaders' failures away.
[3:35:29] why am I perpetrating the lie that there is nothing that we in
[3:35:31] the city can do? Those other cities, they chose
[3:35:36] to fight, and so must we. We cannot afford to sit around
[3:35:40] doing nothing hoping our love can change them and we cannot
[3:35:42] wait for the midterms and hope that a potential sympathetic
[3:35:45] congress will protect us. We must fight, we must resist,
[3:35:49] and we must create a d.c. For all d.c. Residents.
[3:35:52] so I ask you, the leaders of our city, to fight, end all
[3:35:58] collaboration between mpd and I.c.e., both I.c.e. And trunk's
[3:36:03] federal forces. Fully complied, honor, and
[3:36:05] strength the sanctuary values act.
[3:36:09] demand transparency and accountability for mpd, and end
[3:36:15] the cooperation with trump's task force.
[3:36:16] do not allow this white house to use our police force as a tool
[3:36:19] of hatred and tyranny. Finally, protect the families of
[3:36:23] this district and not be federal agents and mpd gangs that roam
[3:36:27] our communities and terrorize our neighbors.
[3:36:29] thank you. [applause]
[3:36:30] chair pinto: thank you. Thank you all very much.
[3:36:34] christina murdoch, clinton james, clinton james, are you
[3:36:42] here? Carly schippits, tanya
[3:36:52] golash-boza, tanya golash-boza, are you here?
[3:36:59] lina s. Alright, christina murdoch,
[3:37:11] public witness, go ahead. Christina: my name is christina
[3:37:14] murdoch. I'm a member of the d.c.
[3:37:19] alliance against racist and political repression.
[3:37:20] we fight for community control of the police, so that the
[3:37:25] people of d.c. Can say who they are policed by and how.
[3:37:31] we were started by a movement to free angela davis from political
[3:37:36] oppression in jail. I'm also a proud member of the
[3:37:41] families not fed. We fight like hell for the
[3:37:49] immigrant community of d.c. It is happening all day long.
[3:37:57] there are people out there in the streets getting taken all
[3:38:01] day long. And it is unacceptable.
[3:38:07] they are members of this community, and they do not
[3:38:13] deserve to be treated like second or third class citizens.
[3:38:20] they are pole humans, just in case anybody here forgot -- who
[3:38:26] le humans with the right to be here.
[3:38:28] I want to talk about the mpd. In 2025, there was 100 65
[3:38:40] complaints against mpd officers. That's 13% higher than 2004.
[3:38:47] in 2025, there were 32 hundred mpd officers.
[3:38:50] that means 1/3 of the police force had a complaint filed
[3:38:56] against them, or some combination have multiple.
[3:39:01] that is unacceptable. 51% of those complaints were
[3:39:10] harassment, 20 2% were inappropriate conduct, and 15%
[3:39:15] were excessive force. I personally have a complaint to
[3:39:23] file for excessive force myself, which I will be adding to that
[3:39:27] total. That's right.
[3:39:33] there's a lot of people here, and it's not just the ones that
[3:39:36] were filed. That number is so much higher
[3:39:37] than it sounds. There were millions spent in
[3:39:42] 2025 that have lawsuits against mpd officers.
[3:39:49] 632 million was the mpd's budget in 2025.
[3:39:55] 20% higher than 2024, and almost 1/3 of the entire d.c. Budget.
[3:40:03] you've heard the stories today. You are going to hear more.
[3:40:07] you already knew the stories. How dare you?
[3:40:15] how dare you pass a budget increasing the authority and
[3:40:20] capability of a violent, murderous force?
[3:40:29] we demand the end to the occupation now.
[3:40:31] [applause] we demand that you charge all
[3:40:37] the agents involved when mpd officers step aside and let them
[3:40:40] go ahead and shoot at or kill somebody.
[3:40:45] and we demand community control of the police, a dccouncil where
[3:40:50] there is -- a council where there is authority from the
[3:40:56] community to say how they are policed and by whom.
[3:40:59] when there's a black or brown person sitting up here, brooke,
[3:41:02] please don't spend two or three minutes on your phone.
[3:41:05] [applause] and say hi to genevieve for me.
[3:41:14] clinton: hi, my name is clinton james.
[3:41:19] I'm a father and a 20-year resident here in washington,
[3:41:22] d.c. I have volunteered my time over
[3:41:25] the past year to responding to sides of immigration arrests,
[3:41:31] because I believe that nobody should be disappeared from their
[3:41:34] communities, and nobody should have to face the violence of
[3:41:37] I.c.e. And mpd alone. I'm speaking today as a
[3:41:43] first-hand witness to mpd's attacks on the immigrant
[3:41:46] community and to demand an end to all federal collaboration
[3:41:51] which corrupts this department. In the summer of 2025, mpd
[3:41:58] helped I.c.e. Arrest over 1200 block people in just over one
[3:42:05] month here in washington, d.c. It was a month of terror.
[3:42:11] mpd led operations, setting up traffic stops all over the city,
[3:42:17] demonstrating to I.c.e. And other federal agents exactly how
[3:42:21] and where to detain the most immigrant people at one time.
[3:42:28] so many of these stops both in person and in footage collected
[3:42:34] by other community members. The trauma was relentless.
[3:42:38] every day, fathers being ripped from their cars, men pinned to
[3:42:45] the ground, screaming for help. Women and children crying,
[3:42:51] begging for mercy. The police siren became the
[3:42:59] trumpets sound of incoming racial terror.
[3:43:01] at one such traffic stop, a checkpoint, I personally was
[3:43:07] threatened by an mpd officer. Filming from the sidewalk, I
[3:43:14] walked by, and a rating camera as I walked.
[3:43:16] mpd, working with I.c.e., an mpd officer turned to me and said,
[3:43:23] you've got a mask on and you are outside all by yourself.
[3:43:30] those words, "by yourself" were chilling.
[3:43:34] I stopped and turned to the officer, "is that a threat, sir?
[3:43:39] are you threatening me?" I was confused.
[3:43:46] "yeah," he replied, "you are threatening me, telling me I'm
[3:43:51] working with I.c.e." he said. The officer took out a cell
[3:43:56] phone and took a picture of me. Others from other agencies
[3:43:59] cheered, "take a picture of him! You are recording him, report
[3:44:03] him!" what a bunch of fucking idiots.
[3:44:12] this collaboration is lawless. They shoot, they murder without
[3:44:16] fear, because they know that there is no oversight.
[3:44:19] [applause] chair pinto: tanya golash-boza,
[3:44:26] public witness. Carly: good afternoon.
[3:44:33] my name is carly schippits, and I'm here to discuss public
[3:44:36] safety and traffic laws. These days, pedestrians are
[3:44:39] terrified to walk outside. We find we constantly need to
[3:44:42] look over our shoulders because so many bike and scooter riders
[3:44:47] flout d.c. Laws. Let's look at some statistics to
[3:44:52] average walking speed is three miles an hour.
[3:44:54] light can easily reach 15 miles an hour, and bikes -- e bikes
[3:44:58] and e scooters can reach more miles per hour.
[3:45:05] walkways are designed to keep pedestrians safe.
[3:45:07] indeed in d.c., it is illegal to ride a bike or a scooter on the
[3:45:11] sidewalk in the central business district.
[3:45:13] it is also illegal for bikes and scooters to ride their bikes.
[3:45:21] nevertheless, every single day I witness bikes and scooters doing
[3:45:24] just that. I have personally been the
[3:45:26] victim of a bike collision. I was walking in a crisis -- in
[3:45:31] a crosswalk when a bike ran a red light and hit me.
[3:45:34] other d.c. Pedestrians have not been as lucky and have sustained
[3:45:38] broken bones, head injuries, and have even died as a result of
[3:45:44] bike and scooter collisions. The presence of bikes and
[3:45:46] scooters on sidewalks and crosswalks is especially
[3:45:49] dangerous for children and bogs. -- and dogs.
[3:45:54] I have a 25 pound beagle mix, and she has had many near misses
[3:46:00] by bikes traveling at top speed. Such a collision would be
[3:46:05] catastrophic for a dog or a child.
[3:46:09] as we all know, children and dogs can go from walking nicely
[3:46:13] in a straight line to veering off to the side in a split
[3:46:17] second, which is likely not enough time for a passing bike
[3:46:19] or scooter rider to react, press the rectum and come to a stop to
[3:46:25] studies have found for a bike traveling at 10 miles an hour,
[3:46:27] the average stopping distance is a whopping 22 feet.
[3:46:31] and a bike traveling at an average walking speed of three
[3:46:33] miles an hour has a stopping distance of 60.
[3:46:38] likely too much to avoid hitting the wandering.
[3:46:46] sadistically, riding on the sidewalk is also less safe for
[3:46:52] cyclists. The reason is most car-bike
[3:46:55] collisions occur at intersections and driveways, and
[3:46:58] a driver is more likely to see a bike traveling on the road than
[3:47:00] they are deceived by traveling on the sidewalk.
[3:47:04] to sum up, a pedestrian safety zone is no place for a
[3:47:07] high-speed metal machine. The d.c. Love requires bikes and
[3:47:15] scooters to stop at red lights. When bike and scooter writers
[3:47:18] face no penalties for disobeying these laws, it creates a
[3:47:22] dangerous situation that leads to pedestrians and rider
[3:47:27] injuries. Please make our sidewalks and
[3:47:31] crosswalks safe. Please enforce traffic laws.
[3:47:36] thank you. Chair pinto: thank you.
[3:47:39] linda s. Lina: thank you for allowing me
[3:47:42] to testify today for my name is lina, and I'm a member of court
[3:47:47] watch d.c. We have arraignments -- we will
[3:47:51] witness arraignments idc court several times a week.
[3:47:54] I'm here to share on mpd's unaccountable and harmful
[3:47:59] collaboration with federal law enforcement.
[3:48:00] because of these -- d.c. Leadership capitulation, to this
[3:48:05] day, we see mpd traveling and roving convoy with I.c.e. And
[3:48:10] portable, setting up traffic checkpoints so they can hang
[3:48:13] people over to federal agents, and swarming loan pedestrians in
[3:48:15] groups of dozens of officers from a grab bag of agencies.
[3:48:19] before the federal surgical idc was already the most heavily
[3:48:22] policed city in america, with the vast majority of this
[3:48:23] policing follows -- focusing on arresting and jailing black
[3:48:28] residents. Mpd collaboration with federal
[3:48:31] law enforcement has not only resulted in the kidnappings of
[3:48:35] immigrants, it has also supercharge the over policing of
[3:48:36] black people, especially black youth, with racial profiling,
[3:48:42] constitutional violations, and reckless filings.
[3:48:44] we found the number of people of rain per day increased by 59%
[3:48:48] after mpd began collaborating with federal agents in august of
[3:48:54] 2025. On some days, court went past
[3:48:56] midnight as over 100 people were arrested.
[3:48:59] a staggering 85% of all people arrested were black, even though
[3:49:04] black people only make up 40% of d.c.'s population.
[3:49:07] this surge in arrest is not about safety.
[3:49:10] violent crime in d.c. Was already at a historic low before
[3:49:13] the federal surge. Through court watch, we found
[3:49:18] the largest increase in arrests per day was for drug related
[3:49:20] offenses, which fully doubled in the weeks after federal
[3:49:23] collaboration began. These are looked nonviolent
[3:49:27] charges, including the possession of marijuana, which
[3:49:30] is decriminalized under d.c. Log aw.
[3:49:36] this is a collaboration at the behest of a racist federal
[3:49:39] government aided and a bed by mpd.
[3:49:40] on top of this, d.c. Residents are slipped up and being handed
[3:49:46] over to a chaotic prosecutor's office led by a former fox news
[3:49:53] propagandist who spoke with relish about locking up children
[3:49:55] in d.c. Under her leadership, court
[3:49:59] watch d.c. Has found prosecutors pretrial percent by 70%,
[3:50:03] seemingly to lock up as many people as possible by any means
[3:50:07] despite judges regularly noticing the witnesses and
[3:50:12] violations of constitutional rights.
[3:50:15] when mpd cooperates with federal agents to arrest people on
[3:50:18] ridiculous charges, this is the hospital system they are
[3:50:21] feeding people into. We know that federal agents are
[3:50:23] ignoring the law, light point blank about incidents, and hide
[3:50:28] their identity. The fact of the matter is they
[3:50:30] are not trained local police, they are the enforcers of an
[3:50:33] authoritarian federal government.
[3:50:35] they care about power, not the law.
[3:50:36] they are making mpd part of that mission and enacting violence on
[3:50:40] our community. I would ask that the council
[3:50:46] meet all of free d.c.'s demands on mpd oversight, especially
[3:50:51] closing a loophole in the century values act.
[3:50:53] thank you. [applause]
[3:50:54] chair pinto: thank you. And thank you all for your
[3:50:59] testimony. We are going to call our next
[3:51:00] panel. The azar, emily emily
[3:51:04] cassometus, bill mefford -- kabbas azhar, emily costa me
[3:51:17] this, bill mefford, and the third chair, joey ferguson, are
[3:51:24] you here? Welcome to you all.
[3:51:33] we will begin with kabbas azhar. >> chairperson pinto and members
[3:51:42] of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[3:51:45] my name is kabbas azhar and I am with the electronic privacy
[3:51:52] information center, a nonprofit s to protect privacy.
[3:51:58] I am also part of the d.c. Coalition and a ward 1 resident.
[3:52:02] do is in a moment of crisis and this crisis makes the income
[3:52:06] meant that the city and mpd be transparent and forthcoming when
[3:52:11] washingtonians demand it. One small portion I would like
[3:52:14] to highlight is a 2016 one-year act and the inability to comply
[3:52:23] to statutes. Mpd records data from all stops,
[3:52:26] frisks, and searches made by mpd officers.
[3:52:32] it requires mpd officers complete the reports practically
[3:52:36] , which includes filling up the stop card, incident, and arrest
[3:52:41] reports. A stop card includes crucial
[3:52:43] information. The reason for the search,
[3:52:47] whether the search was consensual, whether the officer
[3:52:50] seized anything, whether an arrest was made as a result of
[3:52:53] the search, and the charges that followed.
[3:52:55] it also includes a portion where officers can write the suspicion
[3:53:00] that led to the stop. By mpd officers routinely do not
[3:53:03] fill out the stop card. In the audit they did, they
[3:53:10] looked at 77 reports and none of the reports had a stop section
[3:53:14] that was filled out by an officer.
[3:53:17] when mpd was asked about why that was the case, their
[3:53:20] response was, "it is neither visible nor accessible to
[3:53:25] officers when completing their reports."
[3:53:27] it becomes a matter of convenience.
[3:53:29] that is not excuse enough for the conch that's constant --
[3:53:35] they have had a problem complying with transparency and
[3:53:39] I urge the council to investigate why this data is not
[3:53:43] being collected. Other issues include releasing
[3:53:49] data on time. They are supposed to release it
[3:53:51] annually but have rarely done so.
[3:53:53] considering the rapid enforcement, it is important
[3:53:57] washingtonians get access to this data as soon as possible.
[3:54:02] 70% of those stopped were black. When it comes to the youth, the
[3:54:05] numbers are worse. I'm nearly 9000 youth that were
[3:54:09] stopped, 86.2 percent were black.
[3:54:11] 2025 stands to be much worse. Mpd already has the numbers to
[3:54:17] show for it. Mpd released culinary numbers
[3:54:20] for the first half of 2025. They talked about the searches
[3:54:23] they had done, which included pat downs.
[3:54:26] of those 89, 300 625 were black. These numbers from before august
[3:54:34] 2025 include data. I urge the council to push for
[3:54:44] the full data. >> thank you.
[3:54:45] >> emily castanedas, public witness.
[3:54:49] >> good afternoon. I am the assistant professor of
[3:54:56] law at udc law and director of legislation clinic, and I am
[3:55:02] also cochair of d.c.'s local government working group.
[3:55:05] I have been a d.c. Resident for about 15 years now.
[3:55:08] I am here because we still have not seen the progress that we
[3:55:14] asked for at the december 4 hearing.
[3:55:18] I do appreciate you asking mpd specifically about their
[3:55:22] cooperation agreements. Mpd admitted in prehearing
[3:55:27] responses there are 11 federal agencies working with them that
[3:55:31] are operating through the d.c. Safe and beautiful task force,
[3:55:35] which do not have cooperation agreements.
[3:55:39] these law enforcement agencies have little to no training on
[3:55:42] patrol operations, yet that is what they have been doing since
[3:55:46] august 11. They have little to no training
[3:55:48] on d.c. Law but that is what they have been using to detain,
[3:55:51] arrest, and incarcerate people since august 11.
[3:55:56] as a result, two agents shot philip brown in october.
[3:56:02] one billet -- bullet hit so close it pierced the color on
[3:56:05] his jacket. A third agent shot justin nelson
[3:56:09] in november. Officers from the u.s. Marshals
[3:56:11] service and the diplomatic security service were also
[3:56:13] involved. The shooting took place after a
[3:56:17] federal law enforcement initiated a vehicular pursuit, a
[3:56:20] tactic prohibited for mpd for good reason.
[3:56:23] during the pursuit, a non-mock -- unmarked vehicle crashed into
[3:56:28] a bus, endangering many more people.
[3:56:32] in january, bystander video shows what appears to be fbi
[3:56:36] agents using flashbang grenades during a traffic stop.
[3:56:39] I say appears because there has been zero public investigation
[3:56:43] into the incident. Officers on the scene called
[3:56:47] bystanders "fucking idiots" while they legally filled the
[3:56:51] incident and asked officers not to shoot.
[3:56:54] in february, the worst case scenario played out when u.s.
[3:56:57] marshals shot and killed julian bailey during their response to
[3:57:00] a 91 one service call. What do you think federal agents
[3:57:05] will do to hurt black and brown people next month?
[3:57:09] you cannot prevent the abuse of power by federal law
[3:57:12] enforcement, but you can give your constituents the tools to
[3:57:15] demand accountability after the fact, and we need you to play
[3:57:19] your part. But as far as strategy goes,
[3:57:23] isn't poking the bear risky? To quote council member parker
[3:57:28] quoting donald trump, do we have the cards?
[3:57:31] for a year now, d.c. Has been making itself small in the hope
[3:57:35] the federal government will take pity on us or forget about us
[3:57:38] all together. If mayor bowser's campaign of
[3:57:40] appeasement was ever to pay off, last week's showdown over d.c.'s
[3:57:43] new tax law would have been the moment.
[3:57:48] last year when congress needlessly evaporated funds from
[3:57:51] the budget, trump demanded congress restore the $1.1
[3:57:54] billion. This year, the president has the
[3:57:56] power to relieve the district's newest budget crisis at a time
[3:58:01] when the mayor's team has warned budgeting for the next fiscal
[3:58:04] year will be as hard as anything we did during the recession.
[3:58:07] but he did not do that. Bowser has meant the knee and
[3:58:12] she got nothing in return in this critical moment.
[3:58:16] >> I'm sorry, you are over time. >> by signing the resolution,
[3:58:21] the president definitively answers the question whether or
[3:58:23] not her strategy is an effective one.
[3:58:26] it is not. Please take this as a lesson
[3:58:27] learned. >> thank you.
[3:58:31] bill mefford, executive director director of the festival center.
[3:58:36] >> I should just say what she said, but I will add a couple
[3:58:42] things. Thank you, chair pinto, for
[3:58:43] allowing me to speak. I am with the festival center, a
[3:58:48] faith-based community center. We basically provide space in
[3:58:51] one way or another for about 50 nonprofits, and we work with
[3:58:56] dozens more. We are also a member of the
[3:59:00] washington interfaith network. An average of 5000 people per
[3:59:03] month walk through our doors, so safety is of paramount
[3:59:08] importance to us. Thanks to the collaboration,
[3:59:13] this past year has been anything but safe.
[3:59:15] we have had to initiate safety protocols and every day we are
[3:59:19] on high alert as to the presence of mice and mpd in the area.
[3:59:24] it is exhausting. We have had to raise and spend
[3:59:27] an additional $20,000 on new safety equipment to protect our
[3:59:31] guests and our tenants from mpd and I.c.e.
[3:59:36] this is $20,000 I could have gone to support the amazing
[3:59:40] nonprofits who are housed in our building and the ways in which
[3:59:43] they serve d.c. Residents. The reason we have had to take
[3:59:46] all these steps is simple, because our current mayor, this
[3:59:50] council, and this committee have failed to keep us safe and hold
[3:59:54] mpd accountable. Last year, and a large group
[3:59:56] from the festival center met with you to ask for a hearing
[4:00:01] dedicated to ending the collaboration between I.c.e. And
[4:00:04] mpd. We were refused.
[4:00:06] I never understood why. I joined another letter we
[4:00:10] delivered to you on the december 4 hearing, joining with 58 faith
[4:00:15] leaders, and among other things, one of the things we stated in
[4:00:19] the letter was this. "while mpd and federal agencies
[4:00:24] deployed precious resources to arrest people for open
[4:00:28] containers and slipping in parks, residents lined up for
[4:00:31] blocks to access housing support services.
[4:00:36] the juxtaposition could not be starker."
[4:00:41] d.c. Does not need more force, it needs more care.
[4:00:45] therefore, we urge the committee and council to hold a hearing
[4:00:47] and move forward councilmember white's act.
[4:00:52] we also ask that the chiefs order on I's cooperation be
[4:01:00] formally and publicly renounced, and this counsel should insist
[4:01:03] that no officer who works with I.c.e. On their regular time
[4:01:06] should get paid any overtime. We need you to provide oversight
[4:01:11] and accountability. Last year, I remember I was
[4:01:14] sitting at this table up on the fifth floor when you listened
[4:01:21] very passionately and compassionately to a very small
[4:01:23] group of residents in ward 2 who were complaining about loud
[4:01:27] noises from those harassing the chinese embassy.
[4:01:30] your compassionate listening posture, your passion to work
[4:01:35] hard to address their problems is needed now.
[4:01:38] my hope is that you have that same passion to listen to and
[4:01:41] fight for all d.c. Residents. Thank you.
[4:01:44] >> thank you. Joey ferguson, public witness.
[4:01:51] >> hello. My name is joey.
[4:01:55] I'm a pro d.c. Resident living in ward 7.
[4:01:57] I represent a group called d flock d.c.
[4:02:03] we are opposed to the use of automatic license plate readers.
[4:02:07] this technology puts our tribes a, safety, and civil liberties
[4:02:11] in danger, all in the name of profit.
[4:02:13] an alpr logs license plate of every car that drives past it.
[4:02:24] mpd utilizes 66 ale p.r. -- al p r's by a company notorious for
[4:02:31] its surveillance tech. Many are clustered in overly
[4:02:34] police neighborhoods, others are eerily close to a number of
[4:02:36] schools. Normally, mpd is willing to brag
[4:02:40] about its impressive and expensive toys.
[4:02:42] yet when it comes to ale p -- when it comes to alpr's, mums
[4:02:48] the word. Why are they suddenly so
[4:02:51] bashful? Maybe it is because they have
[4:02:55] allowed a private company to spy on us and track our movement,
[4:02:58] whether we are suspected of a crime or not.
[4:02:59] it it is the data gathered is made available and a nationwide
[4:03:05] database searchable by over 4800 other law enforcement agencies.
[4:03:09] yes, that includes I.c.e.. Yes, that includes hsi.
[4:03:13] that includes the rest of the alphabet soup terrorizing our
[4:03:16] streets, throwing flashbangs and killing community members like
[4:03:19] julian bailey. All that doesn't seem to matter
[4:03:25] to mpd, seeing as they want to add an additional $5 million to
[4:03:29] new cameras I the.downtown corridor, cameras are also
[4:03:37] riddled with vulnerabilities on their very few security
[4:03:38] standards for those with access to the database.
[4:03:39] this recklessness is a perfect example of what happens when we
[4:03:43] trust private companies like flock which places profits over
[4:03:47] people. Our safety and privacy are not
[4:03:50] commodities to be bought and sold.
[4:03:54] the data collected by these cameras would no doubt be shared
[4:03:57] with federal agencies with or without flock, either through
[4:04:00] the real-time crime center or the fusion center or simply
[4:04:03] because they ask. So, the only real way to ensure
[4:04:06] this data doesn't end up in the hands of I.c.e. Is to simply not
[4:04:10] collect it. Deflock d.c. Calls on mpd to end
[4:04:19] its relationship with flock and entities of alpr's, regardless
[4:04:23] of who manufactures and maintains them.
[4:04:27] we are spending millions on alpr's, shotspotter's, drones
[4:04:32] that track movement, servers for the getting database, and a
[4:04:37] million dollar a year subscription to celebrate's
[4:04:40] mobile forensics platform, which mpd failed to mention in the
[4:04:43] questions, by the way. Instead of spending money to spy
[4:04:47] on washingtonians, we should instead be investing in them.
[4:04:50] let me tell you something, I love this city.
[4:04:54] long live gogo and the occupation and free d.c.
[4:04:57] >> thank you. Thank you all very much.
[4:05:04] john payne. Barbara mccann.
[4:05:11] l. English. Carol spring.
[4:05:22] ashley james barnett. John payne.
[4:05:28] ok come on second. Barbara mccann.
[4:05:32] carol spring, are you here? Ashley james barnett.
[4:05:42] raj adel. Sandra moscoso.
[4:05:54] robyn swirling. Alright, we will begin with john
[4:06:07] payne, public witness. >> good afternoon.
[4:06:11] my name is john payne. I am a born and raised
[4:06:15] washingtonian and I currently live in ward 4.
[4:06:16] I'm here to testify today about the abuses and harassment mpd
[4:06:20] has inflicted on the city for the past year, especially
[4:06:23] against our black, and house, and immigrant communities.
[4:06:27] I am also here to demand that the dc council end
[4:06:32] cooperation with the federal task force, close loopholes that
[4:06:35] allow agencies to work with I.c.e., and that you do not make
[4:06:38] jeff carroll the new mpd commissioner.
[4:06:41] I want to start by providing several examples of the abuses I
[4:06:46] personally witnessed over the past year.
[4:06:48] this fall while my wife and I were walking through a
[4:06:50] neighborhood, we watched a combination of mpd and fbi pull
[4:06:53] over woman for problems of a temporary tag on her car.
[4:06:57] the woman answered every question calmly and clearly but
[4:07:00] they still felt the need to arrest her and fbi agents
[4:07:04] surrounded her while carrying large weapons.
[4:07:06] why did they need to handcuff a woman for the problem of a
[4:07:08] temporary tag? And why was fbi involved at all
[4:07:13] with the issue of a routine traffic stop?
[4:07:16] another night when I was walking home for my church, I saw a
[4:07:20] combination of mpd, dhs, and part police strip the license
[4:07:23] plates off somebody's car in a routine traffic stop.
[4:07:28] several blocks from my home, mpd, hsi were so busy
[4:07:34] standing around after the arrest of an elderly man that they
[4:07:36] refused to let his wife give him a seizure medication.
[4:07:41] but they would not let him get this life helping medication.
[4:07:44] how is this making any of us safer?
[4:07:48] then just a few weeks ago, mpd without any help from any of the
[4:07:53] federal agencies chased down a man on my block.
[4:07:54] what was his crime? He didn't want to speak to them
[4:07:59] because he was afraid they were going to hurt him.
[4:08:03] they grabbed him, threw him up in the air and smashed him on
[4:08:06] the asphalt. Why?
[4:08:07] because he was afraid they were going to hurt him, and he was
[4:08:11] right. I don't think it is a surprise
[4:08:12] to anyone in this room to learn that all the individuals I have
[4:08:16] been talking about were black residents of d.c..
[4:08:21] even when mpd isn't present, they are to blame for the
[4:08:24] violence committed by the federal task force in d.c.
[4:08:27] mpd shows them where to go, shares radio frequencies, and
[4:08:30] passes wrong information. Because of this, mpd must be
[4:08:34] held accountable for the harm that the task force inflicts on
[4:08:37] this city. And so must this council.
[4:08:39] we have been begging you to end these abuses.
[4:08:42] we are tired of hearing you can't do anything to oversee
[4:08:45] federal agents or that you have sent a letter.
[4:08:47] the harassments, abductions, and murder of our neighbor julian
[4:08:51] bailey are due to your inaction, your collaboration, and
[4:08:54] especially you, chair pinto. His blood is on your hands.
[4:08:59] if you won't defend this city, you should resign and get out of
[4:09:03] the way. We are asking you today to do
[4:09:04] your goddamn job. We have seen over the past eight
[4:09:10] months is not an aberration. The sub in the hallmarks of mpd
[4:09:15] behavior just out in the open. But we are asking you to have
[4:09:19] mpd held accountable for these actions.
[4:09:22] end all cooperation with the task force.
[4:09:24] not with some lot to come later, but end them now.
[4:09:27] close the loopholes in the sanctuary values act, and do not
[4:09:33] appoint jeff carol as mpd commissioner.
[4:09:34] >> barbara mccann, public witness.
[4:09:39] I am going to ask you all -- I know you want to applaud and
[4:09:41] that's ok, but we have a lot of witnesses.
[4:09:44] as I have said, we want to make sure we hear from everybody, and
[4:09:49] so we can talk to the police chief today.
[4:09:54] let's please stay on track. Go ahead.
[4:09:55] >> my name is barbara mccann and I have lived in ward 1 for 28
[4:10:03] years. I am testifying today because I
[4:10:06] am deeply concerned about what I have witnessed as mpd cooperates
[4:10:08] with arms, unidentified men wearing tactical military gear
[4:10:12] on our streets. This is dangerous.
[4:10:14] I am not using the term "federal agents," as in many cases these
[4:10:19] aggressive men or their cars have been identified.
[4:10:23] no badges, no license plates, and sometimes they wear masks to
[4:10:27] shield their identities as criminals often do.
[4:10:30] calling these people federal law enforcement is also problematic,
[4:10:34] as courts across the country have ruled that their behavior
[4:10:36] is outside the law. Yet here in d.c., I have seen
[4:10:40] mpd officers assisting them. Why?
[4:10:45] I did not witness any of the events that have previously been
[4:10:48] mentioned at this hearing, which I have been out all day, but
[4:10:52] since august 2025 I have witnessed ffour arrests.
[4:11:11] I have seem an armed masked man in tactical gear get into an mpd
[4:11:18] squad car, and I have seen armed men taunt onlookers as passive
[4:11:23] mpd officers watched. Aren't they supposed to be
[4:11:25] protecting us? Aren't they supposed to be
[4:11:31] protecting us? I have described kiewit
[4:11:37] incidents I have witnessed. Armed men waiting -- working for
[4:11:40] federal agencies have overrun d.c.'s own law enforcement,
[4:11:43] especially in recent months. Multiple times we have heard
[4:11:45] about this. They have shot d.c. Residents.
[4:11:49] on february 12, they killed julian bailey.
[4:11:51] I attended the vigil. And now we have all witnessed
[4:11:56] the grief of his family. While I personally am not a
[4:12:02] target of federal force, the lawlessness of these people
[4:12:05] means that could change at any moment.
[4:12:08] I now feel fear and distrust when I see mpd squad cars and I
[4:12:12] avoid calling the police for anything, especially since I
[4:12:16] know it will likely endanger my neighbors.
[4:12:18] the dc council can and should take action to enforce basic
[4:12:22] safety steps and to limit how mpd assists the federal
[4:12:27] operations. I am asking you to support
[4:12:29] emergency legislation to identify all federal enforcement
[4:12:32] agents present at an mpd address to facilitate independent
[4:12:38] investigations of all officer-involved shooting's.
[4:12:40] I know there is full accountability and arrest
[4:12:43] reporting emergency amendment act of 2026 for your
[4:12:47] consideration. We need to prohibit mpd from
[4:12:50] court knitting with federal agents in sensitive locations
[4:12:53] like schools, health care facilities, and organizations
[4:12:55] providing aid. And we need a hearing on the
[4:13:02] policing amendment act. We need to restrict vehicle
[4:13:05] pursuits on d.c. Streets. Such a chase resulted in the
[4:13:09] death of a bystander. >> thank you.
[4:13:14] thank you very much. >> we want a d.c. That will be
[4:13:16] safe for all visitors and we need you to take action.
[4:13:18] >> thank you. Sandra moscoso, public witness.
[4:13:22] >> good morning, chairperson pinto, and members of the
[4:13:29] council. My name is sandra moscoso.
[4:13:30] I'm a member of the d.c. Open government commission and a
[4:13:33] proud community member who has worked closely with the
[4:13:37] metropolitan police department for years.
[4:13:39] from community safety walks to building real relationships with
[4:13:44] officers who patrol our neighborhoods, I am here today
[4:13:48] not as an adversary of mpd but a partner who believes the
[4:13:51] transparency is the very foundation of the trust we have
[4:13:56] worked hard to build. I have seen firsthand what a
[4:14:02] collaborative relationship between residents and officers
[4:14:03] looks like. It takes time, consistency, and
[4:14:08] good faith on both sides. And I know that trust once lost
[4:14:11] is incredibly difficult to rebuild.
[4:14:15] that is why I am concerned about the transparency gaps that the
[4:14:19] d.c. Open government coalition has documented and why I urge
[4:14:22] this council to act. First, on arrest information,
[4:14:27] mpd is required by statute to make arrest logs public.
[4:14:31] federal agencies operating in the district are required to
[4:14:34] report their arrests for inclusion in those logs.
[4:14:37] this is particularly important at a time when our crime and
[4:14:40] arrest statistics are being politicized.
[4:14:43] I asked the council to build the public's trust and require mpd
[4:14:48] to publish all statutory arrest information daily on its website
[4:14:52] or at a single accessible location such as mpd
[4:14:56] headquarters. Second, the comprehensive
[4:14:59] policing and justice reform amendment act of 2022 made
[4:15:02] important promises to d.c. Residence.
[4:15:05] promises this counsel passed into law.
[4:15:08] that legislation mandated expanded public access to body
[4:15:11] worn camera footage of officers involved in shootings and use of
[4:15:15] force incidents. But mpd has used foia, privacy
[4:15:19] exemptions beyond what the law requires to delay and obstruct
[4:15:23] access. I asked the council to fund the
[4:15:26] body worn camera provisions of the police reform act so the law
[4:15:29] means something. Third, the same law provided --
[4:15:35] prohibited mpd from using foia exemptions to hide officer
[4:15:39] disciplinary records. A practice that for too long has
[4:15:42] kept the public in the dark about misconduct.
[4:15:45] mpd continues to invoke an exemption that is no longer
[4:15:49] legally valid. I ask the council to fund the
[4:15:54] transparency provision in the fy 2020 seven budget so that
[4:15:58] residents have the information they need and mpd is accountable
[4:16:02] to the community it serves. Fourth, the police reform act
[4:16:08] required the office of police complaints to create a
[4:16:11] searchable database of sustained disciplinary complaints against
[4:16:15] officers. That database does not exist
[4:16:17] because the mayor has not funded it.
[4:16:19] please fund it in this budget. Finally, I support the full
[4:16:26] accountability act. Please do so as well.
[4:16:31] thank you. >> thank you robyn swirling,
[4:16:35] public witness. >> thank you.
[4:16:38] I live in ward 4. I am a lifelong d.c. Area
[4:16:42] resident. On the first night of the
[4:16:44] so-called emergency, I stepped outside to walk my dog and found
[4:16:46] more than two dozen federal agents raiding my neighbors
[4:16:49] house across the street. Mpd officers stood on the
[4:16:54] sidewalk supporting fbi come park police, I.c.e., and metro
[4:16:57] transit for some reason. Since the emergency ended, here
[4:17:01] is some of what I have personally seen.
[4:17:03] hsi and I.c.e. Agents writing in the back of mpd cruisers, mpd
[4:17:08] leading caravans of federal cars, federal agents staging out
[4:17:11] of mpd stations. From my front porch, I witnessed
[4:17:15] a cop pull over a car, then signal to fbi agents in the
[4:17:19] three trailing vehicles to approach the driver.
[4:17:22] fbi agents questioned them, then walked back to the mpd officer
[4:17:26] who was sitting in his car to tell him what ticket to write.
[4:17:29] a couple weeks ago on kennedy street by my house, a routine
[4:17:34] traffic stop for a taillight something or other lead to 14
[4:17:37] fbi, dea agents questioning the driver while mpd stood by.
[4:17:43] these are our neighbors and your constituents.
[4:17:47] the people doing this to them are not accountable to this
[4:17:49] city. They do not live in this city.
[4:17:51] and in many cases are not even willing to show their faces in
[4:17:55] this city. I have seen mpd working
[4:17:57] alongside feds in vehicles with no license plates.
[4:18:00] mpd officers have been imitating their fun new friends wearing
[4:18:03] masks and taunting observers. Mpd and fats like are behaving
[4:18:06] like people who know they will face no consequences.
[4:18:11] and so far, they have been right.
[4:18:12] and that starts at the top. Under jeffrey carroll's
[4:18:16] leadership, mpd provides feds with cars to ride in and traffic
[4:18:21] stops to conduct under federal direction.
[4:18:23] under his leadership, mpd refuses to provide this counsel
[4:18:27] with any data on how many federal agents are operating
[4:18:31] alongside mpd, how many arrests have been made, how many stops.
[4:18:34] he has not been transparent with you and is insulting all of our
[4:18:37] intelligence bike claiming mpd is not collaborating.
[4:18:41] jeffery carroll must not be confirmed as the chief of this
[4:18:43] department. While so much local and national
[4:18:48] attention has been directed at I.c.e., I want to be very clear
[4:18:50] this is not only an immigration issue.
[4:18:53] the dea, atf, fbi, and u.s. Marshals are terrorizing black
[4:18:57] communities in this city, especially in words seven and
[4:19:01] eight, particularly black men and boys.
[4:19:03] we have a long-standing problem with harassment of these
[4:19:05] communities come on now intensified by bringing a dozen
[4:19:08] federal officers along for what used to be two or three local
[4:19:11] cops. Their presence increases danger
[4:19:13] to residents who have been asking for decades for real
[4:19:15] solutions to their safety concerns.
[4:19:18] more police has never met more safety and adding an even more
[4:19:22] unconstrained federal forces with no accountability to our
[4:19:24] city is not making anyone here more safe.
[4:19:27] based on the most recent available data, only 17% of mpd
[4:19:31] officers live in d.c. These federal agents don't if
[4:19:33] you're at all. They are empowered by this
[4:19:36] administration to be in our neighborhoods and are emboldened
[4:19:38] by the cooperation and invitation of this mayor and her
[4:19:41] police leadership. I ask you support the emergency
[4:19:44] legislation requiring identification of all federal
[4:19:47] agents present at mpd arrest, demand a hearing is scheduled on
[4:19:50] the safe community places and policing amendment act before
[4:19:53] the end of march, and publicly commit that you will not vote to
[4:19:55] confirm jeffery carroll. We cannot force the feds to
[4:19:59] change where they focus their enforcement, but we can require
[4:20:02] that mpd is not part of it. >> thank you very much.
[4:20:06] thank you for all your testimony.
[4:20:09] thank you all. We are going to call our next
[4:20:12] panel. Jeff hall.
[4:20:14] paige dennis. Salvador sauceda-guzman.
[4:20:18] robin lipp. Jeff hall?
[4:20:25] is jeff hall here? Ok.
[4:20:33] commissioner, you can come here. His paige dennis here?
[4:20:36] -- is paige dennis here? Robin lipp.
[4:20:43] michael cohen. Commissioner cohen.
[4:20:51] sigute meilus. Elizabeth falcon.
[4:21:01] thai hub and powell. -- ty hobson powell.
[4:21:14] sandra benavente. We will begin with salvador
[4:21:23] sauceda-guzman. Are you testifying in your
[4:21:25] capacity as a commissioner or as public witness?
[4:21:28] go ahead, commissioner. >> thank you.
[4:21:31] good afternoon, everyone. I am here not to speak as a
[4:21:38] latino resident of the city to talk about I.c.e..
[4:21:41] a lot of our brothers and sisters are doing that for us.
[4:21:43] or as a d.c. Resident to talk about the federal occupation.
[4:21:47] again, a lot of our brothers and sisters are talking about that
[4:21:50] today. I am here to talk as an agency
[4:21:51] commissioner. Not to review.
[4:21:57] it is more to talk about mpd and its6 c13
[4:22:03] it is in our city. I am an anc commissioner for the
[4:22:06] south side of ward five. We share a lot of the same
[4:22:09] issues and problems that were entrenched in alongside our
[4:22:13] brothers and sisters east of the river and ward 7 and ward eight.
[4:22:16] and I engaged daily with residents impacted by violence,
[4:22:20] housing instability and crisis. And through all this chaos, I
[4:22:24] still believe in public safety. And I do believe, even given the
[4:22:29] institution might have some problems, that there are good
[4:22:32] officers within the metropolitan police department who care about
[4:22:34] this city. But I'm deeply concerned about
[4:22:38] the operational leadership with mpd.
[4:22:41] over the past year, I've asked 37 officers on patrol.
[4:22:45] one simple question do you know who your watch commander is?
[4:22:49] and out of those 37, only two were able to give me a name.
[4:22:54] and that, to me, has always been something very concerning.
[4:22:56] two and a half. Because one walking and figured
[4:22:58] it out. But still, it's still a
[4:23:00] concerning number for me as an anc commissioner and a resident,
[4:23:04] that that is based on who's at the helm, who's managing, who's
[4:23:09] leading. This isn't a funding issue, it's
[4:23:11] a management issue. If officers on the street do not
[4:23:15] know who is leading their watch, how can we expect cohesion,
[4:23:19] discipline or accountability? Leadership can only appear at
[4:23:23] can not only appear at town halls or public meetings.
[4:23:26] leadership must be visibly present at command, actively
[4:23:31] supervising, reinforcing policy and ensuring standards are
[4:23:34] upheld in real time. I anticipate mpd may respond
[4:23:39] with the that structures exist, that we're doing our jobs, that
[4:23:42] officers are being briefed and that chains of command are
[4:23:45] clear. But if that clarity is not
[4:23:48] reflected in the field, then the system is not functioning
[4:23:51] effectively. You may also hear that
[4:23:53] misconduct is about a bad. A few bad actors, individual
[4:23:59] accountability matters, but weak supervision creates environments
[4:24:02] where misconduct grows and strong officers become
[4:24:06] demoralized or leave. And let me be clear about
[4:24:08] something else. In this city.
[4:24:10] we may not control how federal officers operate.
[4:24:14] we have seen instances where federal federal actors violate
[4:24:17] rights and face limited accountability.
[4:24:19] we know that we heard a lot about that today.
[4:24:21] but mpd is our department. We can control that.
[4:24:25] we have a stake in that. We have a say in that we have
[4:24:27] power in that. If the answers to this council
[4:24:31] of the district of the residents cannot follow these rules, that
[4:24:34] the policies that mpd needs to follow by, we need more real
[4:24:38] oversight with mpd. Thank you.
[4:24:41] thank you. Commissioner.
[4:24:43] robin lippe, public witness. Good afternoon, chair pinto.
[4:24:48] thank you for hosting today's hearing.
[4:24:49] my name is robin lippe. I'm testifying as a ward one
[4:24:52] resident and the parent of a d.c. Native toddler.
[4:24:55] I testified at your hearing on public safety in december and at
[4:24:59] councilmember nadeau's roundtable on potential human
[4:25:01] rights violations by mpd in october, following the december
[4:25:05] 4th hearing, your office led a letter to mpd signed by the full
[4:25:08] council that requested basic data on mpd activities.
[4:25:12] two days ago, mpd submitted responses that show why this
[4:25:16] council needs to stand firm in getting real answers and real
[4:25:19] solutions for the people of d.c. Mpd responses are a mess of
[4:25:24] excuses to avoid stating the obvious plainly, mpd
[4:25:27] collaborates with ice and other federal immigration enforcement
[4:25:31] agencies, threatening safety for all of us.
[4:25:33] buried on pages 66 to 74 of their 244 page response.
[4:25:38] here's my summary of what they say.
[4:25:40] mpd has a formal mou to collaborate with a branch of
[4:25:44] ice, and they regularly work together whenever the us
[4:25:47] attorney's office claims an offense involves human
[4:25:49] trafficking, which could be a lot beyond the scope of that
[4:25:52] mou, mpd also collaborates with hpsci and with ice on joint
[4:25:56] patrols during the so-called emergency and afterwards.
[4:25:58] this paragraph 122, during joint patrols with mpd federal
[4:26:02] agencies are conducting immigration enforcement.
[4:26:05] former chief smith's executive order 25 005 allows mpd to share
[4:26:10] information and provide transportation to help federal
[4:26:12] agencies conduct immigration enforcement on their joint
[4:26:15] patrols. Yet, mpd refuses to provide
[4:26:18] information about the number of federal agents from each agency
[4:26:21] who are participating in their joint patrols.
[4:26:25] mpd either refuses to provide or claims that it cannot provide
[4:26:29] any data on arrests by federal agents, even when mpd is
[4:26:33] present, and mpd takes no responsibility for sharing
[4:26:36] information about federal officers with the public, like
[4:26:39] their names and badge numbers, even when they patrol together,
[4:26:42] these shameful admissions are consistent with what I have seen
[4:26:45] in my own neighborhood in ward 1.
[4:26:47] I have seen joint mpd, cbp detentions in front of schools
[4:26:51] during school hours. On the block where I live, I
[4:26:53] have seen a federal mpd raid on an apartment building with ice
[4:26:56] present in my neighborhood. While walking my daughter to
[4:26:59] daycare, I have seen federal agents and mpd swarm a public
[4:27:03] park used by my daughter's daycare.
[4:27:05] I have seen masked ice agents jump out of unmarked cars and
[4:27:08] kidnap latino workers off the street, in an area that mpd
[4:27:12] patrols extensively. And I hear stories every day
[4:27:14] from my neighbors seeing the same things.
[4:27:16] I worry that my daughters, teachers, or caregivers will be
[4:27:20] disappeared with mpd's help. I worry that children in d.c.
[4:27:23] are witnessing and experiencing violence and harassment from
[4:27:26] police, and learning that they cannot trust the police to help
[4:27:29] them. I join in dc's demands and I
[4:27:32] call on the council to immediately take basic steps to
[4:27:35] protect children from violence by ensuring that mpd is
[4:27:39] accountable. As further detailed in my
[4:27:40] written testimony, for now, I urge you to support the full
[4:27:44] accountability and arrest reporting emergency amendment
[4:27:46] act of 2026. Thank you.
[4:27:50] thank you. Guys.
[4:27:51] I'm going to please ask you all again to help us out.
[4:27:54] I know we've got a lot of colleagues, I hope.
[4:27:56] I hope a lot of my colleagues are going to come up later this
[4:28:00] evening so we can all ask the chief questions.
[4:28:02] but as a reminder, if we if we do an applause for every person
[4:28:07] who testifies, as much as I know you want to, that will add an
[4:28:10] hour or 2 or 3. Okay.
[4:28:17] where are we? Here.
[4:28:18] tie. Hobson.
[4:28:19] powell, public witness. All right.
[4:28:21] first, giving honor to god. Happy black history month.
[4:28:25] happy black history month. I'm here today to talk about
[4:28:28] mpd, but also, I guess, just the larger moral, whether that is
[4:28:31] guiding this moment that we're in right now, because policing
[4:28:35] is never just a local technical issue.
[4:28:36] I think it's a mirror of the moment that you're living
[4:28:39] through. Our policing right now is
[4:28:40] telling the truth about what we're willing to fund, who we're
[4:28:43] willing to fear, and how quickly we accept the idea that some
[4:28:46] people have to be controlled in order for others in this city to
[4:28:48] feel comfortable. When we talk about violence, we
[4:28:51] often talk about it as if it's random.
[4:28:52] but it isn't. Not here, not in gaza, not
[4:28:54] anywhere. It's connected, like I said, in
[4:28:56] the congo and palestine and sudan, there's conflict
[4:28:59] entrepreneurs that profit by turning human life into a
[4:29:02] revenue stream. And it's that same kind of logic
[4:29:03] that lives here. When institutions treat harm as
[4:29:06] an acceptable byproduct, when there's budgets that reward
[4:29:09] force over care, when the suffering of the vulnerable is
[4:29:12] something that we see as administratively inevitable.
[4:29:15] that's why I can't talk about mpd without talking about its
[4:29:18] connective tissue to entities like idf that operate under
[4:29:22] collective punishment. When I see those kind of
[4:29:23] collaborations, I don't think about a safer d.c.
[4:29:26] I think about a dc that's importing a worldview that says
[4:29:28] that security is something that you do to people, and not
[4:29:31] something that you build with them.
[4:29:32] mpd is collaboration with ice is just further proof of that,
[4:29:35] something that's making our neighbors scared to report harm,
[4:29:38] people afraid to seek help, people afraid to take their kids
[4:29:41] to school or afraid to take them to work.
[4:29:43] it normalizes the federal apparatus that acts above the
[4:29:45] law and treats due process like it's an inconvenience.
[4:29:48] we've seen that time and time again from this president.
[4:29:50] if federal officials feel entitled to lawlessness, I think
[4:29:53] that mpd owes washingtonians a duty of care to stand in that
[4:29:56] gap between the community and unlawful intimidation, not to
[4:29:59] grease the wheels for it, and overpolicing and under-resourced
[4:30:02] society will always be left clamoring for more.
[4:30:04] that's from here. That's from here to gaza.
[4:30:07] that's more surveillance. It's more overtime.
[4:30:09] it's more weaponry, it's more cages.
[4:30:11] but it's never more housing. It's never more clinics.
[4:30:13] it's never more food access. It's never more trauma care.
[4:30:16] it's never more schools with counselors instead of cops.
[4:30:19] we keep trying to purchase safety with punishment, and then
[4:30:22] we act surprised when our communities remain unsafe.
[4:30:25] now, police and soldiers alike, they move people across borders.
[4:30:29] they reshape opportunity. They influence who can be in
[4:30:32] what neighborhood, what schools are stabilized, who's public
[4:30:35] transit is watched, who's parks are welcoming, who's houses are
[4:30:39] protected. That's how racial inequality
[4:30:40] works. It's block by block.
[4:30:42] it's stop by stop. It's arrest by arrest.
[4:30:44] in the last decade alone, we've heard of dozens of police
[4:30:47] killings that have pierced our national conscience.
[4:30:49] but there are several hundreds more that we didn't even hear
[4:30:52] about. And we always fixate on
[4:30:55] repairing delegitimising policing through new training,
[4:30:57] new tech, more diverse hiring. We need to redo it.
[4:31:01] we need to redo this in favor of a just system that prevents harm
[4:31:04] before it happens in response to harm, without creating more of
[4:31:07] it. It's not naive.
[4:31:08] it's the practical thing to do. If we can spend on average, over
[4:31:12] $70 million on police time over time annually, we can fully fund
[4:31:16] mental health crisis teams, rent stabilization, violence
[4:31:19] interruption, youth employment, school based clinicians and
[4:31:22] housing that people can afford. What does it say about a
[4:31:25] globally interconnected society that we show a deeper commitment
[4:31:28] to guns and bombs than we do to food, access and shelter?
[4:31:32] thank you. Sandra benavente, advocacy
[4:31:36] manager, ayuda. Good afternoon.
[4:31:38] my name is sandra benavente, and I'm a youth advocacy manager.
[4:31:41] I use as a nonprofit organization that has served
[4:31:44] immigrant communities in dc for more than 50 years.
[4:31:47] we provide legal, social and language access services to
[4:31:50] immigrants and their families, including survivors of domestic
[4:31:53] violence, sexual assault, trafficking, and other serious
[4:31:56] crimes as they navigate government systems in pursuit of
[4:31:59] safety and stability. We are deeply concerned about
[4:32:02] the complicity of mpd and the dc government in exposing immigrant
[4:32:05] residents to harm at the federal level, relatively quiet but
[4:32:10] significant procedural changes are happening in the immigration
[4:32:13] system from the firing of immigration judges to the
[4:32:16] expansion of third country removals, brick by brick due
[4:32:19] process is being dismantled. The federal government is making
[4:32:22] it easier to detain and deport people with less oversight and
[4:32:26] fewer safeguards. This all based in the racist
[4:32:29] belief that black and brown immigrants like me do not belong
[4:32:33] here. The district should play no role
[4:32:35] in advancing that racist agenda. Yet when mpd collaborates with
[4:32:39] federal immigration authorities, they are doing just that.
[4:32:42] they are actively collaborating in actions that terrorize
[4:32:45] immigrants and separate families, violently target black
[4:32:48] and brown neighbors regardless of their immigration status.
[4:32:51] spread fear in every member of the community, and compromise
[4:32:55] public safety. We want to bring awareness to
[4:32:58] mpd's new practice of asking survivors seeking uvsa
[4:33:01] certifications for passports or other identification documents
[4:33:05] in the context of mpd's collaboration with federal
[4:33:08] immigration authorities. These requests create fear and
[4:33:11] uncertainty. As a result, many survivors are
[4:33:14] reconsidering if coming forward is worth the risk.
[4:33:17] mpd has publicly committed to being trauma informed, yet
[4:33:20] community trust has been deeply eroded by the collaboration, and
[4:33:23] practices like this cause further damage.
[4:33:25] what is the purpose of this new practice?
[4:33:28] what safeguards are in place to ensure that information shared
[4:33:31] by survivors will not be shared with ice and other federal
[4:33:35] immigration authorities, and what steps are being taken to
[4:33:37] address the harm caused thus far, our questions and concerns
[4:33:41] about the collaboration's impact on survivors have been ignored
[4:33:45] by mpd. We understand council members
[4:33:47] have sent questions of their own, but this committee is
[4:33:50] charged with oversight, and that responsibility requires more
[4:33:53] than sending a letter and waiting for a response that
[4:33:55] never comes. This committee has tools and
[4:33:58] authority beyond what community members have, and we urge you to
[4:34:01] use them to demand, not just transparency, but accountability
[4:34:05] as well. This committee must strengthen
[4:34:07] and uphold the sanctuary values amendment.
[4:34:09] it must hold mpd accountable to, among other things, end the
[4:34:14] collaboration between mpd and federal agents.
[4:34:17] this also means reducing barriers for immigrant survivors
[4:34:20] by creating clear uvsa certification policies, ensuring
[4:34:24] confidentiality of survivor information.
[4:34:27] every member of our community deserves to be treated with
[4:34:29] dignity, respect and humanity. They deserve clarity and access
[4:34:33] to safety and they deserve a local government that does not
[4:34:36] place them in further danger, especially when they're seeking
[4:34:39] help. Thank you for the opportunity to
[4:34:42] testify today. Thank you very much.
[4:34:44] thank you all for your testimony.
[4:34:45] and if anyone is in the flow over room but has signed up to
[4:34:49] testify in person, if you want to come over to room, are we in
[4:34:53] 120 or 123? We're in 123.
[4:34:55] so if you're in the wilson building and have signed up to
[4:34:58] testify in person, there are now some seats in here if you want
[4:35:02] to come over. So you're ready to go when
[4:35:04] you're called. And we're going to call
[4:35:07] elizabeth falcon up first and then abby hollinger.
[4:35:13] owen schwartz. Miss stet ringler.
[4:35:22] great. Thank you.
[4:35:23] and we'll begin with elizabeth falcon, public witness.
[4:35:26] hello, my name is elizabeth falcon.
[4:35:28] I'm the executive director of dc jobs with justice, dc jobs with
[4:35:32] justice is a 24 year organization working in
[4:35:35] washington, dc, promoting racial and economic justice for
[4:35:39] workers, residents and tenants. The current collaboration
[4:35:45] between mpd and federal law enforcement reflects an expanded
[4:35:48] reign of terror on immigrant and black residents, which is a
[4:35:52] continuation of the attacks that local and federal law
[4:35:55] enforcement have overpoliced in these communities for decades.
[4:35:59] as the executive director at dc jobs with justice, we concern
[4:36:03] ourselves with a variety of laws.
[4:36:05] many of those laws are the ones that are designed to protect
[4:36:08] folks who are vulnerable in their workplaces or in those in
[4:36:11] their homes. And in addition to the chilling
[4:36:14] effect that we're seeing in terms of our neighbors who are
[4:36:16] unwilling to walk around their neighborhoods, take our public
[4:36:19] transit, we're also seeing a chilling effect in people's
[4:36:23] willingness to ensure that their basic the laws that are there to
[4:36:27] protect them are fully enforced. So workers who are less likely
[4:36:31] to report a wage violation or, you know, wages that are stolen
[4:36:35] by their employer as a result of the the chilling environment
[4:36:40] that we're in. Similarly, tenants who are less
[4:36:43] willing potentially to come forward because they see that
[4:36:48] the the boot of the law is up against them.
[4:36:50] and it's not only in this type of legal protections we heard
[4:36:56] recently from deputy mayor turnage that 4000 residents who
[4:37:01] are currently eligible for the dc healthcare alliance have not
[4:37:06] renewed because they are scared, even of institutions that were
[4:37:08] once safe havens like mary center, because they're afraid
[4:37:13] to be part of our society. And that's not surprising
[4:37:16] because there's been a very violent and unaccountable
[4:37:19] activities by ice and other federal agencies, and mpd has
[4:37:23] been with them at the time when parents are tackled to the
[4:37:26] ground in front of other parents, teachers and students,
[4:37:29] we have a real breach of trust that the council needs to take
[4:37:32] very aggressive steps and restore leadership and
[4:37:35] accountability in the management of our public employees.
[4:37:38] I join my allies from free d.c. Harriet's wildest dreams, black
[4:37:42] lives matter, dc, and the many, many other organizations that
[4:37:45] have come here today to ensure that dc uses all of the tools
[4:37:49] that we have to ensure that our public employees, our tax
[4:37:54] dollars, are only used in the service of our values and that
[4:37:57] we enforce our local laws to the greatest extent possible and put
[4:38:01] firewalls between federal law enforcement and local
[4:38:04] enforcement. And we only bring into
[4:38:08] leadership individuals who support our values and assure
[4:38:11] accountability for those who do not.
[4:38:13] thank you. Thank you.
[4:38:20] abby hollinger, immigration staff attorney.
[4:38:24] ida, good afternoon. My name is abby hollinger, and
[4:38:27] I'm an immigration attorney at ayuda.
[4:38:30] my colleague sandra just spoke to some of the most recent
[4:38:33] federal efforts to further strip immigrants of their rights,
[4:38:37] which are being implemented as we speak in this moment, dc
[4:38:41] should be protecting its residents from federal
[4:38:44] overreach. Instead, the d.c. Government and
[4:38:47] mpd are collaborating with ice to funnel more people into
[4:38:52] detention and deportation. I want to talk about what that
[4:38:55] means for ayudas clients. It means a woman was recently
[4:38:58] the victim of a violent crime, but she's too scared to report
[4:39:03] it. The risk of any interaction with
[4:39:06] police, even for victims, is higher.
[4:39:09] when police are collaborating with ice.
[4:39:13] so she decides not to report. It means our clients are
[4:39:18] brutally beaten by dhs. They are being taken into
[4:39:21] immigration custody. Mpd says that they're here to
[4:39:25] protect and serve us. But what about when residents
[4:39:28] need protection from law enforcement itself?
[4:39:32] it means clients who live in maryland and virginia are
[4:39:35] missing appointments with us because they're too scared to
[4:39:38] come into the city. They know that this could delay
[4:39:41] or irreversibly damage their immigration cases, but the risk
[4:39:45] of detention is just too high. In addition to being an
[4:39:49] immigration attorney, I'm a d.c. Native, and I'm part of the
[4:39:52] rapid response organizing in my neighborhood.
[4:39:54] so I also want to tell you what we're seeing on our streets.
[4:39:58] we see dhs staging its operations from the park road
[4:40:03] mpd station, and then we see caravans of mpd and unmarked
[4:40:10] undercover federal vehicles leave the station together,
[4:40:15] drive into our neighborhoods together, and detain our
[4:40:20] neighbors together. I saw this happen a block away
[4:40:24] from my home. A man was pulled over and within
[4:40:29] minutes ice had swarmed the scene.
[4:40:32] they kept this man waiting for a very long time.
[4:40:36] while he waited, he asked us to call his brother and tell him
[4:40:41] what was happening. His brother sobbed on the phone.
[4:40:47] the police and ice eventually let this man go.
[4:40:51] but so much damage had already been done.
[4:40:55] the stories you've heard today point to a very simple truth you
[4:40:59] all cannot fulfill your duty to protect d.c. Residents while
[4:41:05] collaborating with those intent on harming them.
[4:41:11] we call on you to end all collaboration, including
[4:41:15] rescission of the cop order and dismantling of the task force,
[4:41:19] protecting your community takes work.
[4:41:21] we all know that because we show up every day.
[4:41:24] the question is, when will you? Thank you.
[4:41:30] owen schwartz, active at large board member, delta lambda phi
[4:41:35] social fraternity, inc. Go chairperson, pinto.
[4:41:38] members and staff of the committee.
[4:41:40] my name is owen schwartz and I am an undergraduate student at
[4:41:43] george washington university and active at large.
[4:41:46] member of the board of directors of delta lambda phi social
[4:41:49] fraternity. Delta lambda phi was created in
[4:41:52] 1986 right here in dc, in response to the exclusion of gay
[4:41:56] men during the height of the aids epidemic.
[4:41:58] our commitment to justice, dignity and chosen family guides
[4:42:02] the way we show up, especially now across the country and in
[4:42:07] the city. We are seeing a massive increase
[4:42:09] in ice and other immigration enforcement using violence,
[4:42:13] intimidation and deadly force. Immigrant communities, including
[4:42:17] queer, trans, undocumented and mixed status individuals are
[4:42:22] experiencing fear and harm. These are our community's safety
[4:42:27] is built through care, accountability and community,
[4:42:30] not fear, not intimidation and not violence.
[4:42:33] as a board of directors, we urge this committee and the council
[4:42:36] to restore trust by ending mpd's collaboration with ice and
[4:42:41] provide transparency about the work they've conducted with
[4:42:43] federal immigration agencies. The executive order, signed by
[4:42:47] former police chief pamela smith on august 14th, 2025, allows mpd
[4:42:51] officers to share information about persons not in the custody
[4:42:54] of mpd, including those stopped at a traffic stop with federal
[4:42:58] immigration enforcement agencies, as well as provide
[4:43:01] transportation for their agents and detained suspects.
[4:43:04] after this order went into effect, mpd has failed to
[4:43:07] provide clarity about joint patrols between mpd and federal
[4:43:10] agents, which have the authority to conduct civil immigration,
[4:43:14] law enforcement. One such patrol in october of
[4:43:17] 2025 raises concerns about mpd's transparency about its work with
[4:43:21] federal agents. Philip brown was stopped by
[4:43:24] patrol, consisting of mpd officers and agents from five
[4:43:27] federal agencies. Federal agents stepped in front
[4:43:29] of his car and fired two shots into it.
[4:43:31] actions like this further erode public trust and local law
[4:43:34] enforcement, with citizens and non-citizens, many from
[4:43:38] predominantly black and brown communities, fearing for their
[4:43:40] lives every time they leave the house, especially when mpd then
[4:43:44] failed to report that an unarmed black man was shot at by federal
[4:43:47] agents. During that stop, mpd is
[4:43:50] actively eroding public trust as it continues to collaborate with
[4:43:53] ice and other federal agencies. Communities are paralyzed with
[4:43:56] fear that they will be arrested, injured or killed by federal
[4:44:00] agents, regardless of their immigration or citizenship
[4:44:03] status. We can no longer accept business
[4:44:05] as usual as this administration continues to undermine district
[4:44:08] law and racially profile its communities.
[4:44:11] we urge this committee and the council to vote on legislation
[4:44:15] banning mpd's collaboration with ice and federal agents, provide
[4:44:19] full transparency about the extent to which mpd has
[4:44:22] collaborated with ice and federal agents.
[4:44:24] speak out against isis brutality and speak up for the rights of
[4:44:27] d.c. Residents, provide full accountability for federal
[4:44:30] agents who break dc's laws and provide transparency about
[4:44:34] whether agents involved in the murders of alex.
[4:44:37] pretty good are now or have worked in dc.
[4:44:40] thank you. Thank you very much.
[4:44:44] mr. Ringler public witness.
[4:44:46] hello, my name is mr. Ringler and I've been a d.c. Resident
[4:44:49] for ten years, and since august I've been watching mpd assist
[4:44:52] ice in abducting my neighbors off our streets.
[4:44:54] I'm disturbed by the leeway this oversight committee gives mpd to
[4:44:57] commit violence and cooperate with federal forces.
[4:45:00] first and utmost, we must stop mpd's collaboration with federal
[4:45:04] forces. And you have so much power to do
[4:45:07] that. A short, short list.
[4:45:09] vote yes on the far emergency bill, which respectfully goes
[4:45:12] way further than the one you reintroduced yesterday.
[4:45:14] and it has cosigners. It's a better bill.
[4:45:17] prohibit federal officers from using face coverings when
[4:45:20] operating in d.c., require them to follow the same public
[4:45:23] identification rules as mpd. And also, regardless of what the
[4:45:26] feds do, require mpd to include federal officer names and badge
[4:45:30] numbers in our pd. 251 grinstein reports.
[4:45:33] when federal officers are on the scene, repeal local qualified
[4:45:37] immunity for federal officers. Close the loophole on sanctuary
[4:45:40] values act. Request a gps.
[4:45:42] hold a hearing before the end of march, and also revoke mpd's
[4:45:46] cooperation agreements. Why are we cooperating?
[4:45:47] you have the power to make that happen.
[4:45:50] second, we need to end mpd flock camera contracts.
[4:45:53] mpd is operating 66 of them and plans to spend $5 million more.
[4:45:59] flock is a known ice collaborators.
[4:46:01] if you care about our city, you will revoke the mpd flock
[4:46:05] contracts. Next, stop and frisk demand mpd
[4:46:09] do their job. Now that they're extremely well
[4:46:12] funded and published. Stop and frisk data.
[4:46:13] it's a laughing stock. They will continue to make a
[4:46:16] laughingstock until this oversight committee exerts its
[4:46:18] power and forces them to do their job.
[4:46:22] next, oppose jeffrey carroll. He's a known white supremacist
[4:46:25] sympathizer. He's a history of aggressive
[4:46:27] tactics. You have the power to stop
[4:46:29] jeffrey carroll from becoming police chief next.
[4:46:33] this fall, I submitted a foia request to mpd requesting all
[4:46:37] mpd officer photos, which they have, and badge numbers allowing
[4:46:41] for exceptions for undercover officers.
[4:46:43] that foia request was denied. Why?
[4:46:46] for officer for officer privacy, I asked given mpd officers
[4:46:51] conduct their business with their faces visible and their
[4:46:53] badge numbers visible. Why is this a denial for
[4:46:56] privacy? And I was told if I didn't like
[4:46:58] the response, I could appeal it. This is public information.
[4:47:02] I should in bulk, be able to submit a foi request for every
[4:47:05] single public mpd officer and get a list of photos and badge
[4:47:08] numbers. It's no more extra information.
[4:47:10] mpd has it and I'm being denied. That is abhorrent and that makes
[4:47:15] our police officers should not be secret police and we need
[4:47:18] that information. Finally, council member pinto,
[4:47:21] you're asking me and all of residents to vote for you to
[4:47:24] represent us in congress? And right now, I have seen
[4:47:27] nothing to say that you will ever keep me safe or advocate
[4:47:29] against the feds. Thank you.
[4:47:34] thank you all. Thank you.
[4:47:37] we're going to call our next panel.
[4:47:40] kevin bell, mary gregory pemberton, madhvi bahl, and
[4:47:49] pastor delonte golston. Go ahead.
[4:47:54] kevin bell. Okay.
[4:47:57] gregory pemberton. Yes.
[4:47:59] thank you. Madhvi bahl.
[4:48:03] okay. And then, pastor delonte
[4:48:05] golston, are you still here? No.
[4:48:09] okay. Marie.
[4:48:10] drizzle. Thank you.
[4:48:14] all right. Hey.
[4:48:17] hey, everybody. We all in this committee treat
[4:48:20] every person with respect, no matter what they're testifying.
[4:48:24] and we are all going to that. That goes for everybody.
[4:48:26] we're all going to treat everybody with respect and hear
[4:48:29] from our our witnesses. Kevin bell, board member, d.c.
[4:48:35] open government coalition. Yes.
[4:48:39] hello. My name is kevin bell.
[4:48:40] I'm a public records attorney with the free information group
[4:48:43] and award for resident, and I am here today as a board member of
[4:48:45] the d.c. Open government coalition.
[4:48:47] thank you for the opportunity to testify.
[4:48:49] these oversight hearings are critical opportunities to hear
[4:48:51] and act on our city's most pressing issues.
[4:48:54] last month, my client, stephanie clemens, testified about her
[4:48:57] struggle for transparency at the oversight hearing for the office
[4:49:00] of unified communications. And thanks to this body's
[4:49:02] political work and courage, I am pleased to say that she has
[4:49:05] already begun to receive the relief that she needed.
[4:49:07] what's more, last thursday, february 19th, we saw the
[4:49:10] introduction of your chairwoman pinto emergency medical services
[4:49:15] clarification amendment act of 2026, which also addressed
[4:49:17] issues raised in that hearing. So these hearings do clearly
[4:49:20] matter. The city is desperate for
[4:49:22] answers from mpd and brightwood park, where I live.
[4:49:24] I cannot walk two blocks without passing a sign marking a
[4:49:26] community members disappearance by ice.
[4:49:28] lacking any official information about these kidnapings, local
[4:49:31] activists have filled the gap with community knowledge.
[4:49:33] as chair, you have seen firsthand mpd's disappointing
[4:49:37] and inadequate in your words response to your oversight
[4:49:39] letter about mpd's apparently enthusiastic support for federal
[4:49:43] law enforcement. Mpd has long chafed at
[4:49:45] transparency obligations, most recently from the 2022 police
[4:49:48] reform act, which mandated greater access to body worn
[4:49:50] camera footage under foia that would reveal that federal
[4:49:54] cooperation transparency, however, is simply too expensive
[4:49:56] to fit within the mpd's meager $650 million budget.
[4:49:59] the office of the chief financial officer said as much
[4:50:02] in 2024 when it copied and pasted the mpd's $4 million
[4:50:05] guess from a single email with no cited methodology or sources
[4:50:08] to describe how much that would cost.
[4:50:10] less than, of course, we've discussed earlier, we're
[4:50:12] planning on spending on flat cameras in 2024, mpd received
[4:50:16] 792 foia requests for body worn camera footage, of which 16 were
[4:50:19] granted in full 265 in part at a reported cost of $87,000 from
[4:50:24] mpd vendor, or about 325 bucks a pop.
[4:50:27] the cost comes from a professed concern for the strict
[4:50:29] protection of bystander privacy, the same pretext relied by ouc
[4:50:32] to withhold the 911 calls from miss clemons and the same
[4:50:35] pretext rejected last friday by the d.c. Superior court.
[4:50:38] while ordering the release of the five hour, unredacted
[4:50:40] recording of its facilitation of the doge raid on the us
[4:50:43] institute of peace. Using mpd's own law breaking
[4:50:46] tools. Why do I say this is a pretext?
[4:50:48] mpd takes a janus faced approach to privacy and spending,
[4:50:51] operating a 28,000 camera surveillance network frequently
[4:50:54] handed over to the feds, has multiple contractors to surveil
[4:50:56] the social media of d.c. Residents to tap into the
[4:50:58] networks of activists and disrupters, according to public
[4:51:00] records. Obtained foia litigation by the
[4:51:02] brennan center. Mpd also compiles tweets about
[4:51:05] graduation parties, birthdays and cookouts, and ward 7 and
[4:51:07] eight shares compiled social media information with ice, the
[4:51:10] department of homeland security, the usda, amazon, and the ogden
[4:51:15] cap luxury apartment company. For some reason, citations for
[4:51:17] that are in my written testimony.
[4:51:18] despite all of this, mpd still refuses to release any body worn
[4:51:21] camera footage, which features a federal agent in it because of
[4:51:24] the need to protect their privacy.
[4:51:26] we ask the council to fulfill the police reform act's
[4:51:29] transparency promises by mandating the agency spend
[4:51:31] appropriated money on transparency instead of this far
[4:51:33] reaching domestic espionage. Nobody here is naive enough to
[4:51:35] think that the release of records alone will lead to
[4:51:37] change. But if they were not important,
[4:51:39] we do not believe the mpd and the mayor would be trying so
[4:51:41] hard to hide it. Thank you.
[4:51:48] gregory pemberton, president, dc police union.
[4:51:50] thank you. Good morning, members of the
[4:51:51] committee, thank you for this opportunity to testify.
[4:51:52] as the president of the dc police union, I speak on behalf
[4:51:55] of approximately 2800 sworn police officers, detectives and
[4:51:58] sergeants who serve this community as members of the mpd.
[4:52:01] I've been a dc police officer for 21 years, and I take great
[4:52:03] pride in serving the city. When I took office as head of
[4:52:06] the police union in april of 2020, reports showed that we had
[4:52:10] 3797 sworn members on the department.
[4:52:12] the mpd staffing report from february 4th, 2026 states we are
[4:52:15] down to 3156, the lowest total number we have seen in over 50
[4:52:19] years. This is a net loss of 641 sworn
[4:52:23] members, as this attrition rate undoubtedly continues, we could
[4:52:25] see this number drop below 3000 in less than a year.
[4:52:29] while mpd public facing daily crime report has shown declines
[4:52:32] in certain crime categories over the past two years, we should be
[4:52:34] careful to celebrate recent investigations by the u.s.
[4:52:37] attorney's office for the district of columbia and the
[4:52:39] house committee on oversight and government reform have exposed a
[4:52:41] systemic pattern of deliberate crime data manipulation under
[4:52:44] former chief pam smith. These reports confirm what the
[4:52:47] union has long warned mpd command staff and a corrosive
[4:52:49] culture of fear pressured commanders to downgrade serious
[4:52:52] felonies, such as assaults with dangerous weapon robberies,
[4:52:54] burglaries and motor vehicle thefts to lesser offenses or
[4:52:58] noncriminal classifications like injured person to the hospital
[4:52:59] or pending investigation. This not only distorted public
[4:53:03] statistics, but prevented proper investigations, leaving evidence
[4:53:05] uncollected. Detectives uninvolved and
[4:53:08] criminals unaccountable. To put this in perspective, the
[4:53:11] internal national national incident based reporting system
[4:53:14] nibrs data reported to the fbi showed a 2% increase in violent
[4:53:17] crime for 2024, contradicting the dcr's fabricated 28%
[4:53:21] decrease. The usa odc reviewed
[4:53:24] approximately 5800 police reports and identified over 1200
[4:53:28] misclassifications, including 78% of taking property without
[4:53:31] right reports, 33% of aggravated assaults, 68% pending
[4:53:35] investigation cases. This manipulation hid the true
[4:53:37] extent of crime, gaslighting residents about their personal
[4:53:41] experiences and basing public safety decisions on falsified
[4:53:43] data. This command staff officials who
[4:53:45] so blatantly and callously chose to falsify police reports and
[4:53:48] crime stats for their own political benefit, are the same
[4:53:50] officials responsible for investigating union members?
[4:53:52] so when the council made the misguided decision to strip away
[4:53:55] key employee protections such as due process rights and
[4:53:57] disciplinary actions and privacy rights, they hindered unfettered
[4:54:00] authority to an abusive command staff, further eroding morale
[4:54:03] and driving experience personnel out the door.
[4:54:05] the staffing crisis forced mpd to rely on an unprecedented
[4:54:08] amount of overtime hours to maintain basic operations.
[4:54:11] for fiscal year 2025, the mpd used 1.7 million hours of
[4:54:15] overtime, nearly four times the average, costing over $130
[4:54:19] million. This unsustainable pattern is a
[4:54:21] major factor in officers retiring early or leaving for
[4:54:23] other agencies. It is of the utmost important
[4:54:27] that we properly staff to handle any emergency that may affect
[4:54:29] the city. We've handled everything from
[4:54:31] extended periods of civil unrest to pandemics to aircraft
[4:54:34] collisions. Being understaffed undermines
[4:54:36] the safety of the city as well as its citizens and
[4:54:38] institutions. The union asked for the council
[4:54:40] to consider repealing or amending prior legislation that
[4:54:42] is negatively affected. The ability to hire and retain
[4:54:44] our best employees. Specifically, legislation
[4:54:46] affecting employee rights. These are at the heart of mpd's
[4:54:49] performance. Thank you for the opportunity to
[4:54:51] testify. Welcome.
[4:54:51] any questions you may have. Thank you.
[4:54:54] thank you. Madhvi ball, court organizer,
[4:54:58] migrant solidarity mutual aid. Hi, chair pinto, members of the
[4:55:03] committee. We got to stop meeting like
[4:55:05] this. I'm once again here testifying
[4:55:08] about mpd and federal law enforcement collaboration.
[4:55:11] and I'm once again deeply frustrated.
[4:55:13] in fact, there's nothing that I can say today that I didn't
[4:55:15] already say in december or in october or during the many other
[4:55:18] hearings I've testified at in this committee over the years.
[4:55:21] but I will give it a go. My name is madhvi bell.
[4:55:24] I'm a core organizer with migrant solidarity mutual aid,
[4:55:27] or msma. Since january 2025, msma has
[4:55:30] operated a 24 over seven emergency hotline.
[4:55:33] in august, when the expanded occupation of d.c. Began
[4:55:37] overnight, mismos hotline became the emergency hotline for all
[4:55:40] federal law enforcement activity in the district.
[4:55:42] over the past six months, we have fielded thousands of calls
[4:55:45] from d.c. Residents witnessing federal law enforcement harass,
[4:55:49] assault, or kidnap our neighbors while mpd joins in or looks on.
[4:55:53] we have heard from thousands of families desperately trying to
[4:55:56] find their loved ones who disappeared off the street, only
[4:55:59] to learn that ice has them or they're at ccp.
[4:56:02] none of this would have been possible without mpd's full
[4:56:06] throated collaboration. The mayor and this council have
[4:56:08] also played a role in this. By enacting policies and passing
[4:56:11] legislation that have been exploited by mpd and the feds to
[4:56:14] further harm dc residents, such as the mayor's youth.
[4:56:17] curfews to target black youth, or teaming up with the metro
[4:56:20] transit police to target black and brown neighbors at metro
[4:56:22] stations under the guise of fare evasion.
[4:56:25] this should all seem familiar to you, considering a lot if it was
[4:56:29] insecure d.c., and a lot of it was championed by you and then
[4:56:33] and passed by the council. We told you this during that
[4:56:37] fight. We said that when you allow
[4:56:41] people to when you supercharge enforcement, when you expand
[4:56:45] criminalization, it will lead here.
[4:56:47] it doesn't matter if it's mpd doing it or federal law
[4:56:50] enforcement, the policies and the legislation.
[4:56:53] you pass got us here. And I really, really want you to
[4:56:58] understand that. Mpd is a rogue police
[4:57:06] department, and you're doing nothing to rein them in.
[4:57:08] in fact, you're enabling it. This is a police department that
[4:57:11] gave us people like shane lamont, who worked with the
[4:57:14] proud boys, or greg pemberton, who just spoke, who have has
[4:57:18] been seen to rub shoulders with the fascists in chief trump and
[4:57:22] project veritas and interim chief jeffrey carroll, who has
[4:57:25] been who's also seems to have a soft spot for the proud boys.
[4:57:29] are we supposed to believe that these people are not going to
[4:57:31] relish at the chance to work with the feds, to lock up black
[4:57:34] and brown folks? Are we really supposed to
[4:57:36] believe that? I don't, after hearing him
[4:57:39] speak, I definitely don't. I don't know what to say except
[4:57:44] consider please doing your job. And today I invite you all to be
[4:57:48] human beings and protect d.c. Residents and end the
[4:57:52] collaboration. Okay?
[4:58:01] thank you. Thank you everybody.
[4:58:05] marie driscoll, public witness. My name is marie driscoll.
[4:58:10] my family has lived in dc for 170 straight years.
[4:58:15] I am here to testify in support of the metropolitan police for
[4:58:19] more than two years, my neighbors near the chinese
[4:58:23] ambassador's home at s and 23rd streets were subjected to
[4:58:28] harassment. Protesters use amplified
[4:58:31] megaphones to blast messages and mandarin at deafening levels.
[4:58:36] from 7 a.m. Until 9 p.m., seven days a week.
[4:58:40] the situation was so tense that residents could not think
[4:58:43] straight, could not have close family members stay in their
[4:58:46] homes, and could not use their home offices.
[4:58:49] with your support and the leadership of mpd, the council
[4:58:54] enacted legislation to limit amplified noise in residential
[4:58:58] zones. The law is now permanent.
[4:58:59] I am happy to report that the early morning and late night
[4:59:03] noise has finally ceased. I want to thank interim chief
[4:59:09] jeffrey cao during the height of the crisis, deputy chief carol
[4:59:13] showed up unannounced to observe these harassers firsthand.
[4:59:18] he understood immediately that this was not a legitimate first
[4:59:22] amendment exercise, but a calculated game.
[4:59:25] he testified before the council that decibel testing was a cat
[4:59:29] and mouse game. The protesters knew how to rig
[4:59:32] his clear testimony that the residential tranquility act was
[4:59:37] enforceable, and that stationing officers there indefinitely was
[4:59:40] a waste of vital resources. He is instrumental in defining
[4:59:44] this problem and presenting his position supporting the proposed
[4:59:48] law. A major substantive and
[4:59:51] enforceable change in noise laws in 50 years and at the same time
[4:59:56] protecting the first amendment. On a personal note, I was I was
[5:00:01] present when a protester charged at me yelling in mandarin.
[5:00:04] an empty canine officer intercepted her and protected
[5:00:08] me. I am deeply grateful for their
[5:00:11] presence. I also want to address the
[5:00:14] issues regarding ice and crime statistics.
[5:00:17] recently, neighbors were terrified that an ice raid was
[5:00:21] occurring at a church on our block known for its homeless
[5:00:24] feeding program. We contacted church leadership
[5:00:27] and discovered it was actually a medical emergency, and pd
[5:00:33] arrived to assist with the emergency medical service team.
[5:00:39] regarding the. And also, I just want to add, I
[5:00:42] have heard many issues here today of grave concern and am
[5:00:48] and am very impressed with the testimony of tyler hobson
[5:00:52] powell. Regarding concerns over
[5:00:56] downgrading of crime statistics. I welcome a legitimate, serious
[5:00:59] review of these issues. Thank you.
[5:01:04] thank you, thank you all very much for your testimony.
[5:01:07] we're going to call the next panel, alexander howard, julian
[5:01:15] hedlund. Is julia here?
[5:01:20] is julia hedlund here? Yes.
[5:01:24] wayne j. Okay.
[5:01:28] for wayne. Okay, okay.
[5:01:33] jay brown will be there. Talib.
[5:01:36] kareem muhammad and mr. Brown, could you sit next to mr.
[5:01:39] howard, please. And we'll go in order.
[5:01:44] talib. Kareem.
[5:01:45] muhammad, are you here? Kwanzaa.
[5:01:52] billy. Talia.
[5:02:00] brock. Talia.
[5:02:02] brock, are you here? Yes.
[5:02:07] okay. Ashley.
[5:02:08] anderson. Thank you.
[5:02:15] okay. We will begin with alexander
[5:02:17] howard, public witness. Good morning.
[5:02:19] thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today.
[5:02:22] thank you to bridging the information void that was left
[5:02:25] by the executive branch during the snow emergency.
[5:02:28] you and my councilman allen were out there in social media
[5:02:31] telling us what was happening when our government would not.
[5:02:34] this, unfortunately, is an ongoing problem across the
[5:02:37] district. I've been a resident since 2009.
[5:02:39] I've been a journalist here. I've been an advocate for open
[5:02:42] government, including at the sunlight foundation, where I had
[5:02:45] the opportunity to engage with the council and with the
[5:02:49] executive on some of these issues.
[5:02:51] I am grateful to everyone who is engaged in defense of the
[5:02:54] freedom of information act, but I'm disappointed by the
[5:02:57] weakening of public meeting standards and the lapses of
[5:02:59] oversight around transparency and accountability.
[5:03:01] it's very clear that foia is broken.
[5:03:04] I suggest you hold a hearing and hold accountable every single
[5:03:08] official who is supposed to be involved in the administration
[5:03:11] of that. In an age when the public right
[5:03:13] to know about public business has never been more important,
[5:03:15] access to critical police records remains poor across our
[5:03:18] union, including here in the district.
[5:03:20] the mpd is required by law to make its arrest records public,
[5:03:24] including arrests by federal law enforcement agencies that are
[5:03:26] operating here. But despite many improvements to
[5:03:29] the district's open data portal by octo since its historic
[5:03:32] launch in 2008, arrest data continues to be missing context
[5:03:35] and timeliness that would make it relevant to news reporting
[5:03:38] and to public awareness of public policing.
[5:03:40] the council of d.c. Should require the mpd to publish all
[5:03:43] arrest data as open data on the district's portal, with monthly
[5:03:46] audits from staff and biannual oversight hearings.
[5:03:49] mpd has not been honoring an important provisions in the
[5:03:52] police reform act, which the council itself has correctly
[5:03:55] noted are crucial to keeping our police officers accountable to
[5:03:58] the public they serve. This council should be fully
[5:04:01] funding the police reform act to ensure that cost is no longer
[5:04:05] used as justification to withhold and redact public
[5:04:08] records from public access under foia, where when proactive
[5:04:12] disclosures in the public interest.
[5:04:14] this is even more important given the trump administration's
[5:04:17] termination of the national law enforcement accountability
[5:04:20] database that president biden once ordered be created but kept
[5:04:23] secret, which has now been wiped off the books.
[5:04:25] the need for a database to hold law enforcement accountable is
[5:04:28] only grown more apparent this past year, as we've seen a
[5:04:31] secret federal police force engaged in unconstitutional
[5:04:34] policing across our union, including brazen violation of
[5:04:38] civil rights, human rights and civil liberties by anonymous
[5:04:42] officers shielded from liability from the use of force.
[5:04:44] the mpd should be protecting the constitutional rights of every
[5:04:48] person in our union, not just the citizens.
[5:04:51] every person, first amendment rights, fourth amendment rights,
[5:04:55] fifth amendment rights. They should be there to protect
[5:04:58] us against secret police, not be collaborating with them.
[5:05:01] and you should be fully funding the laws that you pass.
[5:05:07] public service is a public trust.
[5:05:08] if you do not implement these laws, you will lose the trust of
[5:05:13] this district and the people can and will hold every member of
[5:05:16] this council accountable for that failure.
[5:05:21] thank you. Shay brown, public witness.
[5:05:28] yeah, so I'm dealing with some shortness of breath.
[5:05:31] so I ain't got time. To play with y'all today.
[5:05:37] I'm sick of the council bs. I'm sick of npd's bs.
[5:05:42] I'm sick of bowser bs and I'm so glad that preaching as pastor,
[5:05:49] whatever that pam smith gon I'm saying this.
[5:05:52] I'm sorry to interrupt you if you could not hold the mic
[5:05:54] because I think it's going to create some echo for the go
[5:05:56] ahead. Okay, do you want me to repeat
[5:05:57] that? Because I would love to repeat
[5:05:59] that part. Okay, cool.
[5:06:03] all right. I hear a lot of talk about
[5:06:08] collaboration and cooperation with mpd and the federal agents.
[5:06:12] I don't look at it. Look at it that way.
[5:06:14] I look at them like they're co-defendants.
[5:06:18] they're co-defendants. And when we sit in positions of
[5:06:22] power, especially positions that are oppressive, like when we
[5:06:26] push the security d.c. Bill knowing that it was a failure
[5:06:29] when you had members of your council tell me to my face,
[5:06:33] don't worry about the sacrifices of the black and brown community
[5:06:36] members. This is a smoke screen for
[5:06:38] congress. I held my tongue because I
[5:06:41] wanted to protect home rule, but it only set up a situation that
[5:06:46] was stronger for the feds to mess with our community.
[5:06:49] those policies failed us, and now it emboldened the federal
[5:06:52] agencies. Please don't become or don't add
[5:06:58] to our view of you, pinto and the council members as
[5:07:02] codefendants of to these atrocities that are going on and
[5:07:05] our community with these federal police who are who is the person
[5:07:10] that's supervising our mpd officers when they're working
[5:07:14] with these individuals? Because when I call the
[5:07:16] commander hickman and every, every time there's an incident,
[5:07:19] he tells me, that wasn't us. That's not us.
[5:07:22] I didn't know they were in our community.
[5:07:24] that's not us. Then what the hell do you know
[5:07:26] who's responsible for them knowing.
[5:07:28] and when those federal agencies out there and our members of the
[5:07:32] community say, hey, who can we talk to?
[5:07:34] where's the supervisor? We get a flash bang, a --
[5:07:38] grenade, a smoke bomb, some mace.
[5:07:41] those are the answers that we're getting.
[5:07:43] I'm sick of it. I feel like I'm begging the
[5:07:46] oppressor about what kind of cotton we picking?
[5:07:49] we really gotta get this together for real.
[5:07:53] when julian bailey got hit up around mayfair, that's the same
[5:07:57] route my daughter take home from school every single day.
[5:08:10] thank you, mr. Brown. You.
[5:08:15] absolutely there, talia brock, program director.
[5:08:19] critical exposure. Good afternoon.
[5:08:21] members of the council. My name is talia brock.
[5:08:23] I'm the program director at critical exposure, a member of
[5:08:26] the youth safety collective and a resident of ward four.
[5:08:29] a critical exposure. We work primarily with black and
[5:08:32] brown youth to transform dc communities and schools through
[5:08:36] youth organizing, storytelling, and photography.
[5:08:38] the impacts of our policing system have long been an issue
[5:08:41] area for us. Much of our past work has been
[5:08:45] connected to the school to prison pipeline, restorative
[5:08:48] justice programs in dc schools as well.
[5:08:51] in the months since august, the residents of this city who have
[5:08:54] already regularly been in the presence of a long list of
[5:08:57] federal law enforcement agencies have had to deal with armed
[5:09:00] national guard and ice agents roaming the streets.
[5:09:03] the youth we work with have shared how deeply anxious they
[5:09:06] are every day. Because of this, black and brown
[5:09:09] residents who have had long reason to distrust law
[5:09:12] enforcement are now seeing mpd work in collaboration with
[5:09:15] federal immigration enforcement agencies.
[5:09:17] it's hard to imagine that seeing families being ripped apart is
[5:09:21] doing anything other than eroding the already tenuous
[5:09:23] level of trust that black and brown youth have with the
[5:09:26] police. Time and time again, our city's
[5:09:28] response to issues of community safety is greater investment in
[5:09:31] law enforcement. Instead, we should be doing what
[5:09:34] youth and advocates have been asking for, for over and over
[5:09:38] again, addressing the root causes, a lack of consistent
[5:09:41] access to the basic material needs that a human requires for
[5:09:44] survival. I'm here today to speak on the
[5:09:47] experiences of two young people who have had experiences with
[5:09:50] law enforcement as evidence of the harmful impact these police
[5:09:53] encounters have on the youth in our city.
[5:09:56] one of the members of our youth organizing collective shared a
[5:09:59] story when her brother was 11 years old.
[5:10:00] he had just gotten money from his father to go to the
[5:10:03] carryout, and while he was on his way, I want to note here
[5:10:05] that he was alone. He was stopped by police.
[5:10:07] three white police officers told her brother to put his hands up
[5:10:11] with tasers in their hands. They detained him, questioned
[5:10:14] him to see if he was a young person they'd been looking for,
[5:10:16] who had allegedly been stealing from a 7-eleven.
[5:10:19] they said that he fit the description.
[5:10:21] her brother told them that it wasn't him, and then one of the
[5:10:24] officers asked for his id they did let him go, but they also
[5:10:28] told him not to tell his parents about this interaction.
[5:10:31] the youth member who shared this story said to me, I want to tell
[5:10:34] people because my brother has gone through so much with the
[5:10:36] police and this is just one of his stories.
[5:10:38] I'm not afraid to speak up about police and how they view young
[5:10:42] black people. Incidents like this are far from
[5:10:44] uncommon, and they deepen the historically rooted distrust
[5:10:47] that black and brown youth develop for law enforcement at
[5:10:49] an early age. Another youth member shared that
[5:10:52] she was heading home on the metro and had run out of money
[5:10:54] to exit the station. She said I don't usually jump
[5:10:56] the fare gates thanks to my mom's advocacy on keeping money
[5:10:59] on my smartrip. One night, I ran out of money
[5:11:01] and my bank account and was with my friend who had a kids ride
[5:11:04] free card. I used her card to get through
[5:11:05] and was immediately stopped by an officer.
[5:11:07] he questioned her. She explained that she had no
[5:11:10] money in her bank account to get through this.
[5:11:12] cop then proceeded to walk her over to the card load reload
[5:11:15] machine and put the only money she had left, which was a $5 in
[5:11:19] cash which she was going to use to buy something important that
[5:11:22] she needed. She then the officer then took
[5:11:25] the card out of her hand, put it on a machine to check to make
[5:11:28] sure that there was money on it, even though he had watched her
[5:11:30] reload it. And then he took her card and he
[5:11:32] used it to spend on a fare gate for another person.
[5:11:36] the last thing I just want to add, in addition to the fact
[5:11:38] that this kind of response, without any level of
[5:11:40] understanding or kindness, exemplifies a harmful use of
[5:11:43] power through the officer's choice to publicly shame her.
[5:11:46] this particular young person is out of high school, but she just
[5:11:48] graduated in may and was only 18 years old at the time.
[5:11:51] the critical exposure is working with the youth power and safety
[5:11:54] collective, which is working on an issue related to young people
[5:11:57] ages 18 1920, aging out of access to kids rides.
[5:12:00] free card. Research from dc action states
[5:12:03] that youth employment in 2024 was 16.4%, three times the
[5:12:07] overall dc unemployment rate. I hope these stories provide
[5:12:10] greater insight into the experiences of dc youth.
[5:12:13] we should not be reinforcing the already booming business that is
[5:12:15] the school to prison pipeline. Thank you.
[5:12:18] thank you, miss frost. Thank you, ashley anderson,
[5:12:23] policy council, dc justice labs. Good afternoon, chairwoman pinto
[5:12:27] and members of the committee. My name is ashley anderson.
[5:12:30] I am a policy counsel with dc justice lab, a resident of ward
[5:12:33] 6 and a member of the iris database coalition.
[5:12:37] today, my testimony will again emphasize that npd's
[5:12:40] collaboration with federal agencies over the last seven
[5:12:43] months has not made dc safer, but has harmed our residents.
[5:12:46] in addition, I will highlight npd's growing and alarming use
[5:12:49] of surveillance technology and how it's harming our neighbors.
[5:12:52] I urge you to act and echo the demands of dc residents to hold
[5:12:56] mpd accountable for the harms committed while working
[5:12:58] alongside federal officers by putting guardrails on mpd
[5:13:01] authority, it is encouraging to see the introduction of two
[5:13:04] pieces of legislation, an important step in the direction
[5:13:07] of transparency, and I look forward to seeing step towards
[5:13:10] accountability. In addition, you must use your
[5:13:12] power as an oversight body to provide transparency around
[5:13:15] mpd's use of surveillance technologies.
[5:13:18] today, at this hearing, you should ask the interim chief
[5:13:20] about what information is being shared with federal entities and
[5:13:23] ask about the disproportionate racial impact of the use of
[5:13:26] surveillance technology. More complaints against mpd were
[5:13:30] filed in 2025 than ever before, with weekly complaints
[5:13:33] increasing. When the federal surge began.
[5:13:35] the office of police complaints reported receiving over 1000
[5:13:38] complaints in fiscal year 2025, a 13% increase over the prior
[5:13:43] year and the highest number the agency has received since its
[5:13:46] beginning more than 20 years ago.
[5:13:47] even after you wrote a letter to the chief in december seeking
[5:13:50] clarity on mpd collaboration with federal agencies, the
[5:13:53] interim chief penned a short response, barely answering any
[5:13:55] of the detailed questions you asked.
[5:13:57] when the interim chief comes today, I urge you and the
[5:14:00] committee to get the answers that dc residents deserve.
[5:14:02] but not only should you get answers to your questions about
[5:14:05] mpd collaborations with federal entities, the council needs to
[5:14:08] act to defend the city against the attacks we are facing.
[5:14:10] I echoed the demands and solutions that I shared in my
[5:14:13] december 4th testimony, such as by using your oversight
[5:14:16] authority to provide transparency and accountability
[5:14:18] for the mpd officer involved. Shootings we saw last fall.
[5:14:22] additionally, I hope the council continues to evaluate excessive
[5:14:25] and unnecessary interactions between law enforcement and
[5:14:28] residents. D.c. Has a growing surveillance
[5:14:32] problem. Just at the last performance
[5:14:34] oversight hearing, former chief pamela smith testified about the
[5:14:37] expansion of cctv cameras and their integration with the real
[5:14:40] time crime center. However, I did not hear any
[5:14:43] concern or consideration about the growing use of surveillance
[5:14:46] technology by mpd. How would this impact residents
[5:14:48] fourth amendment and privacy rights and create harmful
[5:14:51] contact with criminal legal system, while disproportionately
[5:14:54] targeting black and young people in the district?
[5:14:56] for more than a decade, mpd has also maintained in use its gang
[5:15:00] tracking and analysis system, or gang database to secretly
[5:15:03] surveil thousands of residents, often without suspicion of
[5:15:06] criminal activity. As the erased database coalition
[5:15:09] wrote in its letter to this committee earlier this week,
[5:15:11] this database disproportionately includes black residents,
[5:15:14] particularly in ward seven and eight, and the information is
[5:15:16] shared with law enforcement agencies.
[5:15:18] despite ongoing concerns about accuracy, transparency and its
[5:15:21] limited impact for public safety, the coalition demands
[5:15:24] that mpd stop using the gang database again today.
[5:15:27] at this hearing, I urge you to demand more information from mpd
[5:15:31] about its use of surveillance and its impact on residents, and
[5:15:34] I look forward to supporting to establishing more transparency
[5:15:37] on this matter and to ultimately restrict the use of surveillance
[5:15:40] technology in dc. Thank you for the opportunity to
[5:15:42] speak with you all. Thank you.
[5:15:44] thank you all. Talib.
[5:15:48] kareem muhammad, are you here? Great.
[5:15:52] come on up, meg messier. Yes.
[5:15:57] ava. Millstone.
[5:15:59] ava. Millstone.
[5:16:02] okay. Joanna hardy.
[5:16:08] michaela deming. All right.
[5:16:19] is there anyone else in here who has signed up to testify in
[5:16:22] person? Who has not testified yet?
[5:16:27] okay, okay, we will go first to talib.
[5:16:30] kareem muhammad? Yes.
[5:16:32] okay. Yes.
[5:16:35] sorry about that. Good afternoon.
[5:16:37] I'm. I'm talib muhammad.
[5:16:40] I'm a engineer, a lawyer, a ward three resident, former chief of
[5:16:47] staff of the largest dc government agency, former
[5:16:51] counsel to the previous mayor and former special counsel to
[5:16:57] the special committee on dc statehood.
[5:17:00] former chief of counsel for congresswoman sheila jackson
[5:17:05] lee, who oversaw the civil rights committee, which is a key
[5:17:10] committee in the house judiciary committee to determine whether
[5:17:11] or not dc will be a state. And I wanted to give that
[5:17:15] background, first of all, to let everyone know that I'm also
[5:17:18] running for mayor of washington, dc.
[5:17:20] and the reason why I'm running for mayor is because the current
[5:17:23] members of the council, including councilmember janice.
[5:17:29] george and yourself for two years in a row, we came before
[5:17:33] the council invited by the chairman to put forth a idea to
[5:17:38] keep our young people safe after school.
[5:17:39] as you all know, the violent hours, most violent hours during
[5:17:43] the week is generally the time between 3 and 6 when our young
[5:17:47] people are out of school and their parents are oftentimes at
[5:17:50] work for two years in a row. Instead of allocating the monies
[5:17:53] that could have been used to keep our young people safe and
[5:17:56] keep them from engaging in conduct that none of us would
[5:18:01] like to see, you all chose to say no to that money, but yes to
[5:18:07] the billionaires first, the billionaires who own the
[5:18:10] washington wizards and then the billionaires who own the
[5:18:13] washington commanders. That's what a mentor of mine
[5:18:16] pulled me to the side and said, talib, the people currently
[5:18:18] running dc government don't care about the youth.
[5:18:20] and if you really want to see change, you're going to have to
[5:18:23] be that change and run for mayor.
[5:18:26] if elected as mayor from day one, I would end all
[5:18:29] collaboration with all federal authorities, not just ice.
[5:18:32] as was stated by congressman or councilmember janice george, but
[5:18:37] all federal authorities. We need to reestablish that law
[5:18:42] enforcement in the district of columbia is a local concern.
[5:18:46] second of all, we would end the idf training that happens
[5:18:52] through the federal government's training of our dc law
[5:18:55] enforcement. We need to end that.
[5:18:57] second of all, we would end the bans against businesses from
[5:19:03] protesting and boycotting the genocide by the current laws
[5:19:07] that prevent companies from getting contracts if they
[5:19:12] boycott israel. In conclusion, I'd like to just
[5:19:15] invite everyone here to the 15th annual ramadan iftar that's
[5:19:20] scheduled to take place downstairs on next tuesday.
[5:19:24] everyone is invited and we will be standing for our brothers and
[5:19:28] sisters, both in palestine, our brothers and sisters in all
[5:19:32] eight wards, and prayerfully end the occupation of d.c. Free d.c.
[5:19:38] okay, thank you mr. Muhammad. I do want to remind folks that
[5:19:41] we cannot politic in this building.
[5:19:46] we are here around mpd oversight.
[5:19:51] so as I stated at the beginning, we've all got to follow the
[5:19:54] rules, including those of us who enforce the rules.
[5:20:00] okay, meg messier, public witness.
[5:20:03] good afternoon, chairperson pinto and members of the
[5:20:05] committee. My name is meg messier, and I'm
[5:20:07] a staff attorney at the domestic violence and family law unit at
[5:20:10] legal aid d.c. Legal aid. D.c. Works with survivors of
[5:20:13] domestic violence by helping them navigate their civil
[5:20:15] protection order, or cpo cases, family court matters, and
[5:20:19] immigration matters. This work requires significant
[5:20:21] coordination with mpd. I want to bring attention to
[5:20:24] several areas of concern regarding mpd's interaction with
[5:20:26] our client communities. First, mpd has been inaccurately
[5:20:30] reading court documents and laws.
[5:20:33] survivors rely on mpd to provide accurate information when they
[5:20:35] are in stressful and dangerous situations.
[5:20:38] however, we continue to hear of instances where mpd misinformed
[5:20:41] district residents about the law.
[5:20:43] for example, encouraging survivors to file for cpos even
[5:20:46] when the incident they report is not an intrafamily offense as
[5:20:49] required by law, or telling survivors incorrect ways to
[5:20:52] serve respondents with necessary court documents.
[5:20:55] these inaccurate recommendations create safety risks for
[5:20:58] survivors. Second, mpd has increasingly
[5:21:01] arrested survivors of domestic violence.
[5:21:03] survivors rely on mpd to be able to assess the situation,
[5:21:06] identify the primary aggressor, and take steps to keep survivors
[5:21:09] safe. Unfortunately, over the past
[5:21:12] year, at least seven legal adc clients who have been
[5:21:14] experiencing domestic violence from a partner were arrested
[5:21:17] following an incident where they were the victims of domestic
[5:21:20] violence. Survivors should be able to rely
[5:21:21] on mpd for protection, not fear, arrest or other consequences.
[5:21:26] next, mpd does not have a proactive process for gun
[5:21:28] relinquishment by respondents for all tpos and many cpos
[5:21:32] respondents are prohibited from possessing, purchasing or
[5:21:35] receiving any firearms or ammunition while the order is in
[5:21:38] effect. We know that an abuser's access
[5:21:40] to a firearm makes it five times more likely that the survivor
[5:21:43] will be killed by their abuser. Currently, mpd officers don't
[5:21:47] ask respondents about firearms or relinquish firearms when
[5:21:50] serving or enforcing tpos or cpos.
[5:21:53] mpd officers need to have a proactive process for gun
[5:21:55] relinquishment to ensure survivor safety.
[5:21:58] next, mpd continues to decline certification of uva's u visas
[5:22:02] offer immigrant crime victims temporary legal status to file a
[5:22:06] petition for a u visa. Crime victims must get
[5:22:09] certification from a law enforcement entity that the
[5:22:11] victim has been helpful in either the investigation or
[5:22:13] prosecution of a crime. Even where a victim has been
[5:22:17] fully cooperative, mpd refuses to certify u visas where another
[5:22:20] law enforcement agency is involved.
[5:22:22] mpd refusal to certify isn't survivor centered.
[5:22:26] last, the lack of clarity surrounding mpd's cooperation
[5:22:29] with ice discourages survivors, immigrant survivors from
[5:22:32] reporting crime and providing information to mpd.
[5:22:35] the presence of ice has caused immigrant victims in d.c. To
[5:22:37] fear for their well-being, distrust law enforcement, and
[5:22:40] decide against seeking protection for themselves.
[5:22:42] immigrant survivors like our client should be able to
[5:22:44] interact with mpd to ensure their safety without fear of
[5:22:48] immigration related consequences.
[5:22:50] in all, mpd response to domestic violence survivors remains a
[5:22:53] critical point in survivors journeys, and we appreciate the
[5:22:56] opportunity to testify today. Our written testimony lays out
[5:22:59] these issues and more in more detail.
[5:23:01] thank you very much. Thank you.
[5:23:06] michaela deming, policy director, dc coalition against
[5:23:09] domestic violence. Thank you.
[5:23:10] good afternoon, chair, pinto and staff.
[5:23:11] thank you for the accommodation of testifying.
[5:23:14] my name is michaela deming. I'm the policy director for the
[5:23:16] dc coalition against domestic violence, the federally
[5:23:18] recognized statewide coalition of domestic violence service
[5:23:21] providers here in dc, serving upwards of 1000 victims of
[5:23:25] domestic violence survivors on any given day across all eight
[5:23:27] wards of the district. Improving public safety in the
[5:23:30] district requires protecting victims and witnesses of crime,
[5:23:33] regardless of their background. When survivors of violence are
[5:23:36] afraid that contacting the police exposes them and their
[5:23:38] loved ones to violent federal law enforcement actions, they
[5:23:41] often remain silent. Rather than seeking the
[5:23:43] protection and services they urgently need and deserve.
[5:23:47] all dc residents are less safe when victims and witnesses are
[5:23:50] discouraged from reporting crime and seeking safety and justice
[5:23:53] like they are now. Over 75% of advocates who work
[5:23:57] with immigrant survivors of violence report that their
[5:23:59] clients express concern about contacting the police to report
[5:24:02] domestic violence and sexual assault, and half of those
[5:24:05] victims ultimately chose not to call the police because of that
[5:24:08] fear. Here in dc, immigrant survivors
[5:24:11] and black and brown folks, regardless of citizenship or
[5:24:13] legal status, have shared that they are afraid to come to
[5:24:16] service providers offices to seek help or go to court for
[5:24:19] protection orders. Every day, domestic violence
[5:24:21] survivors. Our neighbors are making
[5:24:23] impossible choices for themselves and their children.
[5:24:25] between their physical safety and d.c. And the potential of
[5:24:28] being ripped away from their children permanently and
[5:24:31] returned to dangerous situations that they may have fled.
[5:24:34] the lack of clarity about the collaboration with mpd, national
[5:24:37] guard, ice and all the other law enforcement entities has made
[5:24:40] our work increasingly challenging and has put
[5:24:44] survivors, the survivors we work with, at even greater risk.
[5:24:49] we spoke recently with a deputy mayor for public safety in front
[5:24:53] of this committee, and heard from her a lack of firm
[5:25:00] rescission of the police chief's executive order here now before
[5:25:03] the mpd committee hearing, want to make sure that the committee
[5:25:07] is aware that the police chief's executive order expanding
[5:25:11] cooperation and permitting ice to, quote, share information
[5:25:13] about persons not in mpd custody with federal immigration
[5:25:18] enforcement agencies is in fact, still in place.
[5:25:19] it has not been rescinded despite numerous requests to
[5:25:23] rescind that order or any legal confirmation to support that
[5:25:26] it's no longer operational. You might hear in that person's
[5:25:30] not in mpd. Custody, of course, would
[5:25:32] include victims and witnesses of crime.
[5:25:34] I hope you raise these unanswered questions with mpd
[5:25:37] today. I also want to highlight a
[5:25:41] couple of other things. One, the rate of domestic
[5:25:43] violence homicide in the district is rising, and that is
[5:25:47] even with the declines in homicides overall and also want
[5:25:51] to raise, as has already been raised a couple of times, the
[5:25:54] uva certification process concerns in the recent changes
[5:25:58] in what mpd is requiring. At the very same time that
[5:26:01] federal law enforcement is using the guise of unlawful
[5:26:05] immigration as a reason for subjecting our neighbors to
[5:26:07] increased violence and enforcement, mpd is making it
[5:26:10] nearly impossible for immigrant survivors to pursue lawful
[5:26:14] status, appreciate the opportunity to testify.
[5:26:20] thank you very much, miss deming, and thank you to
[5:26:23] everybody for being here today and for your your testimony.
[5:26:26] we are going to turn to our virtual witnesses who have
[5:26:31] joined us today. I'm going to call some names as
[5:26:34] a reminder to please accept your invitation to join as a
[5:26:39] panelist. O geoff a nanuku elizabeth page,
[5:26:43] cecilia bruni, cheryl k, afeni evans, tiffany montgomery, paula
[5:26:52] edwards, max ewert, sofia boschetti, vanessa lopez.
[5:26:59] queen, odissi, shane sullivan, christine conroy, kristi
[5:27:06] matthews, jones, mary calhoun. I'll give you all a moment to
[5:27:20] join. I see cecilia bruni on so we can
[5:27:27] get started with you. But as a reminder to everybody
[5:27:31] else joining us for virtual testimony to please accept your
[5:27:35] invitation to join as a panelist, we will begin with
[5:27:39] cecilia bruni, public witness. Good afternoon, chairperson
[5:27:44] pinto and members of the committee.
[5:27:45] my name is cecilia bruni and I'm a staff attorney in the reentry
[5:27:49] justice project at legal aid d.c.
[5:27:52] since 2015, legally, reentry justice project has assisted
[5:27:56] clients facing barriers to accessing housing, employment
[5:27:59] and other necessities due to their criminal record.
[5:28:01] we help community members seek record clearing relief, most
[5:28:04] frequently under the second chance amendment act or caa.
[5:28:08] that work requires that we interact with mpd to request
[5:28:11] arrest histories for clients and certifications that their
[5:28:13] records have been sealed at legal aid.
[5:28:16] we've been excited to see the increased access to
[5:28:19] opportunities and greater sense of dignity that the caa provides
[5:28:22] for our client community, and we appreciate the council's
[5:28:24] commitment to increasing public safety through enacting the caa.
[5:28:29] yet administrative delays and challenges that stem from
[5:28:32] interacting with mpd have hindered the scars impact.
[5:28:35] I'm here today to speak about three areas of concern related
[5:28:39] to mpd that continues to create barriers to individuals seeking
[5:28:43] record clearing relief in the district.
[5:28:45] first, we experience frequent delays when requesting arrest
[5:28:48] histories from mpd. Arrest histories are documents
[5:28:52] that list all of the client's d.c. Arrests.
[5:28:54] they're necessary for sealing motions, and they must be
[5:28:57] requested and picked up in person.
[5:28:58] although some arrest history requests are fulfilled within
[5:29:02] weeks, mpd sometimes takes multiple months to fulfill a
[5:29:04] request while providing no status updates.
[5:29:07] we also have had several clients receive inaccurate mpd arrest
[5:29:11] histories and have seen clients struggle to obtain their arrest
[5:29:13] histories from mpd until a legal service provider steps in to
[5:29:17] assist. These delays.
[5:29:19] slow down the already lengthy process of record sealing for
[5:29:22] our clients. They require additional time and
[5:29:24] labor on our staff's part, and they raised concerns for us
[5:29:27] about mpd, respect for our client community, and the ease
[5:29:30] of access to necessary records for community members looking
[5:29:33] for relief under the sca. Second, to request an arrest
[5:29:37] history mpd requires sensitive information about clients,
[5:29:40] including their social security number and place of birth.
[5:29:43] we are very concerned that requiring this information
[5:29:47] deters individuals who are not u.s. Citizens from pursuing
[5:29:50] record clearing relief between fears over mpd's cooperation
[5:29:53] with ice and the usao focus on identifying noncitizens through
[5:29:57] dc's court system, we are troubled that immigrant members
[5:30:00] of our client community are not getting the same access to
[5:30:03] record clearing relief as their citizen counterparts.
[5:30:07] third, mpd often fails to provide certifications of
[5:30:10] sealing within 90 days as required by the sca and court
[5:30:14] orders. These certifications are some of
[5:30:16] the only means by which an individual can know whether the
[5:30:19] relief that they've been granted has been realized.
[5:30:22] for clients, this delay means that despite having a court
[5:30:25] order in hand sealing their criminal records, the barriers
[5:30:28] that the sca sought to eliminate instead can persist.
[5:30:32] thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
[5:30:35] we urge the committee to ensure that mpd improves how it works
[5:30:38] with system impacted community members and aligns its practices
[5:30:42] with the council's goal of expanding public safety through
[5:30:45] record sealing relief, so that all community members can gain
[5:30:49] full access to the relief offered under the sca.
[5:30:52] thank you. Thank you, afeni evans.
[5:31:08] hello. Good afternoon, councilmember
[5:31:12] pinto and members of the judiciary and public safety
[5:31:14] committee. My name is afeni evans, and I'm
[5:31:16] a community organizer with the fair budget coalition.
[5:31:18] I'm here today because I am disgusted with the metropolitan
[5:31:22] police department's immoral and illegal participation with ice
[5:31:25] and the federal task force. Year after year, members of the
[5:31:29] public come to this committee asking for the counsel that is
[5:31:32] on the people's payroll to divest from the brutality of
[5:31:36] punishment and policing, and to send money to other committees
[5:31:39] to invest in social safety nets that actually have been proven
[5:31:44] time and time again to be effective in creating safety.
[5:31:48] every piece of legislation that you have put forward,
[5:31:52] whitewashing, police misconduct and emboldening brutality and
[5:31:55] criminalizing our children has laid the groundwork for the
[5:31:59] worst outcomes of this federal occupation.
[5:32:02] on august 15th, I was pepper sprayed, slammed to the ground
[5:32:05] and arrested for what should have been a civil citation.
[5:32:09] I was held for 18 hours with pepper spray in my eyes, all
[5:32:13] over my face and all down the front of my body in places that
[5:32:17] you don't even want to imagine. While this action was not
[5:32:22] carried out by mpd, your officers were on the scene
[5:32:26] actively collaborating and this incident is indicative of the
[5:32:29] culture of policing that has led in the district that that in the
[5:32:32] district that is led by mpd and legislated by you, every
[5:32:38] unlawful arrest, every unnecessary detainment, every
[5:32:42] single unwarranted police shooting is on your hands.
[5:32:44] and mark cross got up here and said that there were three
[5:32:47] complaints. And then it shot up to 87, which
[5:32:49] makes it clear to me that this agency is either not properly
[5:32:53] tracking its officers or they are purposely obfuscating the
[5:32:57] truth. There has been collaboration
[5:33:01] between mpd and ice. That is a fact.
[5:33:04] it is also true that it is a violation of the law.
[5:33:08] and further collaboration with the federal occupation
[5:33:12] undermines dc's autonomy. So my questions are these how
[5:33:16] much of our money is going towards collaborating with the
[5:33:20] federal occupation? How many officers are lended in
[5:33:23] support of these ice kidnapings, and how does this impact their
[5:33:27] use of overtime? It is your job, council member
[5:33:30] pinto to get these answers, to oversee this agency and to hold
[5:33:33] them accountable. Do your job and maybe then I
[5:33:36] will thank you. Thank you, miss evans.
[5:33:43] oh, hefa anyanwu, aclu d.c. Saldana.
[5:33:51] who are you here? Go ahead.
[5:33:57] of course. Didn't unmute.
[5:33:58] sorry about that. Hello, chair pinto and members
[5:34:02] of the committee. My name is anna echo and I
[5:34:05] present the following on behalf of aclu d.c.
[5:34:08] my written testimony goes into more detail about how we got to
[5:34:11] this current moment, and also touches on the search for new
[5:34:14] police chief, a process that should be transparent, inclusive
[5:34:18] and centered. D.c. Communities most impacted
[5:34:20] by police and community violence.
[5:34:23] there's much to be said about the impact of federal
[5:34:26] interference on dcs inability to be nimble.
[5:34:28] in this moment, however, we must acknowledge that the groundwork
[5:34:32] for the severity of the federal takeover was laid by a history
[5:34:36] of defiance from mpd, as well as actions from from district
[5:34:41] leaders, including the council. While for some, the clock
[5:34:44] started last august, the abuses of power we are seeing from
[5:34:47] federal agents and mpd are not new black latina immigrant
[5:34:52] communities who have always been.
[5:34:54] the canaries in the coal mine have long been the primary
[5:34:56] targets of police brutality and used as political fodder.
[5:35:01] in response to calls for more investments in community based
[5:35:04] solutions to violence, dc leaders gave more money to mpd.
[5:35:09] they also passed legislation such as security, and dcc, that
[5:35:13] further criminalized certain segments of the population, with
[5:35:16] an urgency that did not exist for reining in mpd.
[5:35:20] accountability measures that were passed, such as the
[5:35:22] establishment of a police misconduct database, went
[5:35:25] unfunded. The defiance mpd leaders
[5:35:27] continue to exhibit can be attributed in part to the
[5:35:30] council's reluctance to take up measures.
[5:35:33] excuse me? The council's reluctance to take
[5:35:35] up measures that address transparency and accountability.
[5:35:39] this reluctance has resulted in a history of mpd officers and
[5:35:42] the department writ large, acting with an air of impunity,
[5:35:46] mpd has gotten use to there being no consequences when they
[5:35:50] disregard district laws or violate department policies when
[5:35:54] they fail to implement, when they fail to implement
[5:35:57] recommendations or publish reports or lie about their
[5:36:00] policing practices. Mpd is emboldened by a lack of
[5:36:04] pushback. For instance, when department
[5:36:06] leadership decided to reinstate terrance sutton and andrew
[5:36:10] zubowski, who were found guilty and convicted of murdering karen
[5:36:13] hilton brown and conspiring to cover it up, this history is why
[5:36:18] mpd officers can feel comfortable not reporting
[5:36:20] federal agents who shoot dc residents and leadership lying
[5:36:23] about the department's engagement in immigration
[5:36:26] enforcement. While the dc council has taken
[5:36:28] actions that have had negative impacts on the public's faith in
[5:36:31] this body, this moment presents a critical opportunity to
[5:36:35] ameliorate some of those harms. The council can meet this moment
[5:36:38] by taking bold actions to surrounding mpd, and by working
[5:36:42] with impacted communities on meaningful solutions that do not
[5:36:46] center policing. It can start by acting on the
[5:36:49] recommendations outlined in the report by the committee on
[5:36:51] public works. Thank you.
[5:36:58] thank you. I want to note we've been joined
[5:37:01] by my ward 4 colleague, council member janeese lewis george.
[5:37:08] all right. We will turn to tiffany.
[5:37:11] tiffany montgomery. Hi.
[5:37:15] good afternoon. Can you hear me?
[5:37:18] yes, we can hear you. Thank you very much for the
[5:37:22] opportunity to testify regarding mpd.
[5:37:25] I first want to thank. Mpd leadership for not just
[5:37:32] communicating with me, but for also communicating with legal
[5:37:37] staff at congress. After it was discovered that the
[5:37:43] dc office of the inspector general had.
[5:37:48] lied to mpd and also destroyed and falsified government records
[5:37:54] to give a little bit of background information.
[5:37:57] I'm a whistleblower, and I reported fraud at the d.c. Board
[5:38:02] of ethics and government accountability, also known as to
[5:38:06] my former supervisor, director of office of open government,
[5:38:11] nicole allen was referred for criminal investigation by dc
[5:38:15] department of human resources and subsequently and separately
[5:38:21] by mpd. Mpd had referred not just miss
[5:38:25] allen for criminal investigation, but several other
[5:38:28] people at baga. And unfortunately, the dc office
[5:38:30] of the inspector general outright lied to mpd about
[5:38:35] conducting those criminal investigations.
[5:38:38] it was later discovered that oig not just lied to law
[5:38:43] enforcement, but oig has destroyed and falsified
[5:38:48] government records and part of the reason why the bowser act
[5:38:54] was introduced by senator mike lee and congressman andy ogles
[5:39:01] is because criminal suspect nicole allen has basically made
[5:39:06] it difficult or less than honest concerning government
[5:39:13] transparency to the public and to government officials.
[5:39:17] so criminal suspect nicole allen is responsible for the
[5:39:21] enforcement of open government and foia laws.
[5:39:24] and she is in fact, contradicting what she's
[5:39:28] supposed to do in her official capacity.
[5:39:31] baga has concealed or sometimes ignored complaints made by
[5:39:37] members of the public or government officials who have
[5:39:43] filed violations of ethics complaints to baga, and these
[5:39:47] complaints were ignored fully, or sometimes just hidden or
[5:39:52] concealed or ignored. And so other people have
[5:39:57] contacted congress independently.
[5:40:00] and I'm thankful for those individuals.
[5:40:02] and once again, I am thankful to mpd leadership for referring
[5:40:07] criminal suspect nicole allen to various law enforcement
[5:40:13] agencies, and for also communicating with legal staff
[5:40:17] at gop oversight. And I am disappointed in dc
[5:40:21] council for illegally reappointing a convicted felon
[5:40:24] by the name of darren sobin to, as well as every other corrupt
[5:40:29] baga board member who was fraudulently appointed,
[5:40:34] including felice smith, who misrepresented her legal
[5:40:37] qualifications when she was first appointed in may 2019.
[5:40:40] she wasn't even licensed as a lawyer until december 2023,
[5:40:44] which oig falsified. The government records
[5:40:48] concerning. Thank you for the opportunity to
[5:40:50] testify. Thank you.
[5:40:55] paula edwards. Commissioner edwards, are you
[5:41:09] on? Okay.
[5:41:15] max ewert. Good afternoon.
[5:41:22] my name is max ewert. I'm a native washingtonian, ward
[5:41:27] 1 resident and an organizer with the dmv chapter of the
[5:41:30] international jewish labor bund. Our organizing is guided by the
[5:41:34] political philosophy of yiddish for hereness bundists believe
[5:41:39] that our collective liberation is not tied to a nationalistic
[5:41:42] project, but in solidarity with working in marginalized people.
[5:41:45] where we live today. I'm here to testify regarding
[5:41:48] the performance of the metropolitan police department.
[5:41:51] over 100 people here today have spoken and will continue to
[5:41:55] speak on mpd's collaboration with federal agents and how they
[5:41:58] have collectively decimated our community.
[5:42:01] I would like to speak specifically about cellebrite
[5:42:04] and more specifically, the pathfinder ai software, a tool
[5:42:07] that mpd has been using to more efficiently, efficiently harm
[5:42:11] our neighbors. Cellebrite is a surveillance
[5:42:14] company that has contracts with ice, mpd, and many other police
[5:42:17] agencies throughout the world. They created the universal
[5:42:21] forensics extraction device, or ufd, to break into phones and
[5:42:24] extract their data. More recently, cellebrite has
[5:42:27] been offering has been offering their pathfinder tool, an ai
[5:42:31] software by celebrates own omission can be used to analyze
[5:42:36] location data, correlate like phone numbers or other
[5:42:39] identification methods, interpret slang and coded
[5:42:42] language, and analyze images and videos, including facial
[5:42:45] analysis. This is personal data that can
[5:42:47] be scraped and analyzed, even if mpd does not have a valid reason
[5:42:50] to search or retain someone's phone, or has coerced vulnerable
[5:42:54] people to hand over their phone for fear of prosecution,
[5:42:58] something that mpd has done in the past.
[5:43:00] additionally, I would like to add that in mpd's responses,
[5:43:04] they lied about the ai tools that they are using.
[5:43:06] specifically on question 199, where they stated the only ai
[5:43:09] tools that they use are from the adobe suite, leaving off the
[5:43:13] pathfinder ai tool. Mpd has had a pathfinder
[5:43:16] contract since 2022, and is slated to renew that contract.
[5:43:20] this tool has undoubtedly been used to wreak havoc on the
[5:43:23] migrant community and our black and brown neighbors, who have
[5:43:25] historically been overpoliced and criminalized.
[5:43:28] access to this data would allow mpd, or anyone they work with to
[5:43:31] track down, identify and surveil children, neighbors, or anyone
[5:43:34] in proximity to someone whose cell phone data they have
[5:43:37] scraped. Even you.
[5:43:38] I would be shocked to find out that this was not used in
[5:43:41] collaboration with federal agents.
[5:43:43] mpd's use of this surveillance tool reminds me of ibm's
[5:43:46] collaboration with nazi germany, where the company's technology
[5:43:49] was used to systematically target my ancestors in europe,
[5:43:52] making it easier for the nazi party to commit genocide.
[5:43:56] celebrates inhumane use by mpd is not an isolated occurrence.
[5:43:59] there is documented use of this company's technology against
[5:44:02] protesters and organizers abroad.
[5:44:04] the unfortunate reality is that cellebrite is not alone in its
[5:44:07] abuse of personal privacy with their surveillance tools.
[5:44:10] there are many companies who do something similar.
[5:44:12] is my goal today to urge the council and this committee not
[5:44:15] to play whack a mole with surveillance companies as a tool
[5:44:18] for the police, but to abolish the use of them outright.
[5:44:21] thank you. Thank you so who else do we have
[5:44:34] here? Sophia boschetti.
[5:44:38] I'm here. Okay.
[5:44:40] vanessa lopez. Christina.
[5:44:44] corey. Hello.
[5:44:47] sorry. One second.
[5:44:49] hi. Good afternoon.
[5:44:51] chairperson pinto. My name is christine corey, and
[5:44:54] I am a born and raised washingtonian currently residing
[5:44:56] in ward 5. I'm here today to testify about
[5:44:59] mpd's ongoing collaboration with federal agencies, as well as
[5:45:03] npds use of invasive technologies such as automated
[5:45:06] license plate readers or alpr as a tool of surveillance.
[5:45:10] it is true that dc has always been a heavily policed and
[5:45:13] heavily surveilled city, with its black, brown and immigrant
[5:45:16] communities suffering the greatest consequences.
[5:45:18] but the escalation of violence and terror we have seen in
[5:45:22] recent months has been shocking and represents a fundamental
[5:45:25] threat to human rights for all residents of the district.
[5:45:28] so many of our neighbors are too afraid to even go outside to do
[5:45:32] everyday tasks, like getting groceries for fear of harassment
[5:45:35] or detention. While mpd has denied and
[5:45:39] downplayed its collaboration with ice and other federal
[5:45:42] agencies, there is abundant footage available that indicates
[5:45:44] the exact opposite. In addition to the harm caused
[5:45:47] to our most vulnerable communities, the persistent
[5:45:50] obfuscation of a reality that so many of us have witnessed with
[5:45:53] our own eyes erodes public trust and further contributes to the
[5:45:57] culture of fear that has overtaken our city.
[5:46:00] amidst this growing climate of violence, terror and distrust,
[5:46:04] we are also facing rapidly increasing surveillance.
[5:46:07] mpd operates 66 floc automated license plate readers in dc, and
[5:46:11] records indicate that mpd intends to spend between 1
[5:46:16] million and $5 million to expand floc cameras in the downtown
[5:46:18] corridor. Whatever the stated rationale
[5:46:20] for these systems is, the fact is that they collect data about
[5:46:23] all our movement without any guarantees or protections in
[5:46:26] place to ensure that it is not misused.
[5:46:29] these cameras are connected to a national network where law
[5:46:33] enforcement agencies, including federal agencies, can query the
[5:46:36] data, and floc has a track record of collaborating with
[5:46:39] ice. Given that mpd has not responded
[5:46:42] to a freedom of information act request for the floc data, we
[5:46:45] have no way of knowing how they are using it.
[5:46:48] but even if we had transparency from mpd or felt we could trust
[5:46:52] them not to collaborate with ice, the overarching security
[5:46:55] and privacy concerns associated with alpr pose a major civil
[5:46:59] rights issue. The only way to ensure that the
[5:47:01] data do not end up in the wrong hands is not to collect it,
[5:47:06] investing millions in surveillance technology does not
[5:47:09] actually prevent crime or make us safer.
[5:47:11] investing in our communities to address the root causes of harm
[5:47:14] is the only path forward to a safer d.c. For all.
[5:47:18] these problems will not be solved overnight, but I would
[5:47:20] like to close with a by no means comprehensive list of actionable
[5:47:25] items. Require federal agents operating
[5:47:27] in dc to follow the same requirements for public
[5:47:30] identification as mpd, including including displaying name, badge
[5:47:34] number, and agency information that is not removable and
[5:47:36] prohibit face coverings for federal officers in d.c.
[5:47:40] require mpd arrest reports to list all officers from all
[5:47:43] agencies present during the arrest.
[5:47:45] this should include officer names, badge numbers, and
[5:47:47] descriptions of their use of force.
[5:47:49] close the loophole in the sanctuary values act and finally
[5:47:53] end mpd's relationship with floc and all automatic automated
[5:47:56] license plate reader technologies.
[5:47:58] thank you for your time. Thank you.
[5:48:02] ego mclean. Ego mclean.
[5:48:09] ego mclean. Yes.
[5:48:14] hello. My name is ego mclean.
[5:48:16] I live in ward five and I am a student attorney in the movement
[5:48:19] lawyering clinic at howard university school of law.
[5:48:22] I'm testifying today in place of queen, who can't testify but
[5:48:26] will be submitting written testimony in coordination with
[5:48:29] the erased the database d.c. Coalition.
[5:48:32] I am among the many d.c. Residents deeply concerned about
[5:48:35] the destruction of my fellow citizens lives and the upending
[5:48:38] of my community through mpd surveillance, targeting,
[5:48:42] stalking, and harassment of black and brown dc residents.
[5:48:47] aedc also upholds a commitment to transformative and
[5:48:50] alternative forms of care and justice.
[5:48:52] we work in coalition with decrim, poverty, poverty dcc,
[5:48:55] which works to empower dc residents into systems of care
[5:48:58] that meet their needs instead of criminalizing them.
[5:49:01] I am urging the council to reject not only usage of the
[5:49:05] gang database, but its entire existence.
[5:49:07] the dc gang database is one part of a larger body of invasive
[5:49:12] discriminatory surveillance. It strengthens the school to
[5:49:16] prison pipeline, accelerates gentrification, and installs
[5:49:19] other harmful systemic barriers to community enjoyment and
[5:49:22] enrichment that directly impact black and brown dc residents.
[5:49:26] out of the nearly 700 people listed on the database, children
[5:49:29] make up almost 20% of the listed individuals, all of those
[5:49:33] children being people of color, some as young as one year old.
[5:49:37] this racialized surveillance has led to more interactions with
[5:49:40] police, impacting those children's futures, either by
[5:49:42] placing them on a track to prison or by cutting their lives
[5:49:45] short. Technologies like floc,
[5:49:48] cellebrite, tangles, shotspotter and others add layers of
[5:49:51] surveillance that ensure that once labeled a gang member, mpd
[5:49:54] can keep constant tabs on an unknowing person.
[5:49:58] such wraparound surveillance increases the likelihood someone
[5:50:01] will be trapped in the criminal legal system and a cycle of
[5:50:05] poverty. These risks are exacerbated for
[5:50:07] those who aren't able to insulate themselves from
[5:50:10] surveillance, like unhoused and housing insecure residents.
[5:50:14] I have seen over surveillance and punishment tear apart
[5:50:18] families as it's torn apart my own.
[5:50:20] instead of funding, social services funding went to
[5:50:23] surveilling my family members and creating barriers to their
[5:50:26] success. Their recidivism was nearly
[5:50:29] unavoidable. I know what becomes of those who
[5:50:31] are wrongly identified as gang members and as a resident of
[5:50:34] ward five, I see the daily harm of surveillance and policing of
[5:50:39] black and brown neighborhoods. As a law student, educated in
[5:50:43] sociology and an emerging movement lawyer, I recognize
[5:50:46] that over surveillance masquerades as a heroic effort
[5:50:50] to keep all communities safe, but instead it serves to protect
[5:50:54] rigid systems that continue to prey on and punish dc residents
[5:50:58] that would benefit from real care and safety, such as drug
[5:51:02] checking services, reallocation of funds to health care, and
[5:51:06] other comprehensive harm reduction services.
[5:51:08] instead of investing into 24/7 surveillance, harassment, and
[5:51:13] abuse of black and brown residents, adults and children
[5:51:17] alike, we must invest in centers and emergency services that
[5:51:23] provide care to those in crisis or on the verge of crisis.
[5:51:27] we must focus on funding services that actually empower
[5:51:32] residents like on point nyc. Scaling up our 988 number
[5:51:37] services, crt and champ services.
[5:51:39] services like on point nyc have provided care to those who lack
[5:51:43] access to it, instead of criminalizing them.
[5:51:46] this is particularly important given the consequences of the
[5:51:50] war on drugs and the opioid crisis here in the district.
[5:51:55] we demand that the council listen to the voices of black
[5:51:58] and brown residents of the district when they tell you how
[5:52:01] they are harmed by system you say are meant to care for them.
[5:52:07] public safety is not created. I'm sorry to cut you off your
[5:52:10] very over time. Okay.
[5:52:13] thank you so much. Okay.
[5:52:18] mary. Laura, are you mary calhoun?
[5:52:22] are you. Yes.
[5:52:23] that's me. Hi.
[5:52:24] okay. Go ahead.
[5:52:26] okay. Thank you.
[5:52:28] good afternoon. And thank you for giving me the
[5:52:29] opportunity to testify on mpd's performance in the district.
[5:52:33] my name is mary laura calhoun. I live in ward four and teach in
[5:52:36] ward five at the same school. My own children attend.
[5:52:39] today I will tell you about a disturbing recent incident I
[5:52:42] witnessed involving metropolitan police officers cooperating with
[5:52:46] federal agents. What I am about to tell you
[5:52:48] happened in september after trump's federal emergency had
[5:52:52] long ended, and we had been told by mayor bowser and the chief of
[5:52:55] police that our own police force would no longer be cooperating
[5:52:58] with the trump regime regime. School had just finished, and I
[5:53:01] had picked up my own kids from their classes.
[5:53:03] we were just passing time on the playground when we heard that
[5:53:06] law enforcement officers were on the other side of the school,
[5:53:10] likely arresting someone for immigration related reasons.
[5:53:12] out of concern, I approached the scene while video recording.
[5:53:16] when I arrived, I saw several officers from multiple agencies
[5:53:20] working together. Fbi, mpd and some others too far
[5:53:24] away for me to read their jackets.
[5:53:26] they and several police cars were surrounding two men who
[5:53:29] were handcuffed and seated in the street.
[5:53:31] as I approached from a distance, one mpd officer yelled at me
[5:53:35] that simply by being present and, quote, distracting him, I
[5:53:37] was, quote, interfering with the scene.
[5:53:39] he moved towards me aggressively and demanded that I move to a
[5:53:43] specific location, otherwise he would arrest me.
[5:53:45] although I knew I was doing nothing unlawful and was within
[5:53:48] my rights to observe and record a police encounter in a public
[5:53:51] space, I felt scared for my own safety.
[5:53:53] the officer used his authority to intimidate me and anyone
[5:53:57] nearby from witnessing the arrest.
[5:53:59] in that moment, I was scared for my own safety and that of my
[5:54:02] family and that of the families of children at my school.
[5:54:04] we saw mpd officers hand one of the arrested men to a masked
[5:54:08] federal agent who put the man in an unmarked car.
[5:54:11] they refused to answer questions of why the men were arrested or
[5:54:14] where they were being taken. The fear we all felt in that
[5:54:17] moment hasn't left any of us. Of course, families who may be
[5:54:20] targeted by immigration enforcement are scared to bring
[5:54:22] their children to and from school.
[5:54:24] children are worried for their families and even people who may
[5:54:27] have previously thought they have no reason to fear.
[5:54:29] the police now know that dc's mpd does not exist to keep us
[5:54:32] safe, but to intimidate us. When I last testified before
[5:54:35] council about this incident in december, council member pinto
[5:54:38] said she'd like to have someone from her office follow up with
[5:54:41] me. Someone emailed me and asked
[5:54:43] where and when the incident occurred, which is information I
[5:54:46] provided. The last I heard from council
[5:54:48] member pinto's office was an email dated january 13th that
[5:54:52] read, only apologies for my late reply, but we have been looking
[5:54:55] into this incident and appreciate the details you
[5:54:58] provided. I have filed an official
[5:55:00] complaint with the office of police complaints.
[5:55:02] I was offered mediation and I declined.
[5:55:05] I don't feel safe around this officer, and I don't see how
[5:55:08] having a private conversation with someone so inclined to
[5:55:10] abuse his power would help. The last I heard from opc, the
[5:55:14] incident was still being investigated.
[5:55:16] I doubt any real consequences have happened and I presume this
[5:55:20] officer is still on the force intimidating other law abiding
[5:55:23] citizens across the district. Along with d.c., I am asking for
[5:55:27] some basic common sense reforms that will make us all safer.
[5:55:30] mpd arrests should list all officers from all agencies
[5:55:34] present. Mpd should be prohibited from
[5:55:36] coordinating with federal agents, repeal local qualified
[5:55:40] immunity protections for federal officers.
[5:55:41] close the loophole in the sanctuary values act.
[5:55:45] no cooperation with the occupation.
[5:55:47] thank you. Thank you.
[5:55:53] commissioner kim, commissioner paula edwards, are you here?
[5:55:59] commissioner paula edwards? Just making sure.
[5:56:03] okay. Okay.
[5:56:04] thank you very much. Yes, I am here.
[5:56:06] I'm sorry. Can you hear me?
[5:56:08] go ahead. Thank you.
[5:56:09] I'm very sorry. Thank you very much for allowing
[5:56:12] me to testify today. I'm paula edwards, commissioner
[5:56:16] for anc. 401, and I would like first to
[5:56:20] extend my condolences to mrs. Bailey and her family on the
[5:56:22] death of her husband. Please implement the
[5:56:26] recommendations from open data government and the office of the
[5:56:29] d.c. Auditor. Accurate, timely and publicly
[5:56:32] accessible information is the only way that our elected
[5:56:34] officials can govern equitably and engage in good decision
[5:56:38] making that protects the community, defendants and mpd,
[5:56:42] ending racially profiled stops and searches, warrantless
[5:56:46] arrests, masking of officers and requiring body worn cameras are
[5:56:50] other necessities. Necessary reforms needed mpd
[5:56:53] must invest in rapidly disseminating clear, accurate,
[5:56:56] and timely information to combat the rumors and misinformation
[5:56:59] that fill the vacuum. Programs like the community
[5:57:03] engagement academy are also very effective.
[5:57:05] I thought I had heard enough bombastic rhetoric, bad data,
[5:57:08] and demonization to last a while last night.
[5:57:11] and then came the hearing today, 163 complaints filed with a
[5:57:15] force of 3200 officers does not mean that one third of the
[5:57:19] officers have had complaints filed against them.
[5:57:21] black people making up 86% of arrests, while black people make
[5:57:25] up 40% of residents, does not mean that everyone arrested is a
[5:57:29] d.c. Resident. In the case of late mr. Hilton
[5:57:32] brown, a wholesale condemnation of the culture of mpd does not
[5:57:36] acknowledge the judge's opinion that if it had not been for the
[5:57:40] actions and testimony of captain porter of 4d and the detectives
[5:57:44] that investigated the case, the officers who tried to cover up
[5:57:47] the crime would not have been convicted.
[5:57:50] the bombast may play well to the base and enhance fundraising,
[5:57:53] but it results in governmental chaos.
[5:57:56] this type of rhetoric tends to divide and conflict us at a time
[5:58:01] when we should be united, and that is the goal of autocratic
[5:58:05] governments. Montgomery county and dc are
[5:58:07] reporting similar crime data, but only dc's data is questioned
[5:58:11] as manufactured, valid, warranted arrests are being
[5:58:14] reported as ice kidnapings in d.c. And maryland and ice dump
[5:58:19] of kidnaped children's backpacks was reported in our ward.
[5:58:22] except it was a dump of workers backpacks by car thieves who are
[5:58:27] preying on those who are most vulnerable to ice.
[5:58:29] we have had reports that young people are being lured into
[5:58:32] gangs with promises that they and their families will be
[5:58:35] protected from ice. Those who need our protection
[5:58:38] the most are being separated from law enforcement by fear and
[5:58:42] misinformation. And I thank you for the
[5:58:45] opportunity to testify. If you have any questions, I'm
[5:58:48] available. Thank you very much,
[5:58:53] commissioner. And thank you all on this panel
[5:58:56] for your testimony sheet. It we are going to call our next
[5:59:02] panel. Please accept your invitation to
[5:59:05] join as a panelist. Laura fuchs, marie cohen, jenny
[5:59:12] wilson, irene jacobs, austin rose, brendan jackson, virginia
[5:59:19] spatz, patrick burke, karen gall, edward daniels, edna
[5:59:25] boone, afeni evans, naima konate, rebecca gordon, and
[5:59:32] mariah burke. Rains.
[5:59:48] okay. Mr.
[6:00:00] okay. Laura fuchs, are you here?
[6:00:05] okay. Marie cohen, child welfare
[6:00:10] monitor. There we go.
[6:00:14] yeah. Okay.
[6:00:15] all right. Great.
[6:00:15] thank you. Good afternoon, chairperson
[6:00:18] pinto and members of the committee.
[6:00:20] my name is marie cohen. I live in ward six and I write
[6:00:24] child welfare monitor d.c., a substack about child
[6:00:28] maltreatment and child protection in the district.
[6:00:30] I never thought of writing about criminal justice until I
[6:00:33] realized how many parents and caregivers who kill a child by
[6:00:37] abuse or criminal neglect go unpunished.
[6:00:39] as part of a study on child maltreatment deaths in the
[6:00:43] district, I identified the following seven cases that were
[6:00:46] classified as homicides by ocm between 2022 and 2025, and have
[6:00:52] apparently been not resulted in any prosecution so far.
[6:00:56] storm, serenity frazier, one and a half months old, died on
[6:01:01] january 21st, 2022. The cause of death was blunt
[6:01:04] trauma of head and neck, fentanyl and heroin toxicity.
[6:01:08] the washington post reported that mpd was investigating the
[6:01:11] case, but mpd has released no further information on the
[6:01:15] investigation. King phelps, seven months old,
[6:01:18] died on march 16th, 2023, of complications of blunt force
[6:01:22] trauma. Mpd announced in a press release
[6:01:25] that it was investigating this death, but has released no
[6:01:29] information since that time. Amiri royall bynum, who was two
[6:01:32] months old, was pronounced dead on may 27th, 2024.
[6:01:36] the cause of death was fentanyl and methamphetamine
[6:01:40] intoxication. Mpd announced that it was
[6:01:42] investigating amiri's death as a homicide, but has released no
[6:01:45] further information on this investigation.
[6:01:48] thomas tramposch, age four, was found dead in a car on galloway
[6:01:52] street north northeast on june 14th, 2024, one of the hottest
[6:01:57] days of the summer. A police spokesman said the
[6:02:00] detectives were awaiting autopsy results.
[6:02:02] the autopsy, conducted the next day, concluded that thomas died
[6:02:06] of hypothermia. Hypothermia and and ruled his
[6:02:11] death a homicide. But mpd has released no
[6:02:14] information on this case. Jordan ballard, age one, died on
[6:02:19] august 23rd, 2024, of multiple blunt force injuries.
[6:02:22] mpd announced that it was investigating jordan's death but
[6:02:25] has released no further information.
[6:02:28] austin antonio oliver, an infant, died of fentanyl
[6:02:31] intoxication on august 2nd, 2025.
[6:02:34] mpd has released no information about this death.
[6:02:38] cairo shaw, an infant, died from blunt force head injuries on
[6:02:41] february 2nd, 2024, according to kfs, a fatality report, mpd was
[6:02:47] unable to determine the identity of the maltreatment and no
[6:02:50] arrest was made. Three times.
[6:02:52] I asked mpd for updates on these cases, these cases, but I
[6:02:55] received no response. In contrast to these seven
[6:02:59] homicides where nobody has been charged, there were only six
[6:03:01] child abuse or neglect homicides during the same period that have
[6:03:05] resulted in prosecution. It is not acceptable for mpd to
[6:03:09] say it is investigating and then never to follow up or answer
[6:03:13] questions from the public about the status of an investigation.
[6:03:17] just finishing punishing the perpetrators will not bring
[6:03:19] these children back, but child killers, like all killers, must
[6:03:23] be held accountable. There is something wrong with a
[6:03:26] city that is indifferent to the deaths of children due to the
[6:03:29] violence or negligence of those who are supposed to love and
[6:03:32] protect them. Thank you so much for listening.
[6:03:34] and there's more information in my written testimony.
[6:03:37] thank you, miss cohen. Jenny wilson.
[6:03:45] thank you, chairperson pinto and members of the committee.
[6:03:47] my name is jenny wilson and I'm the crisis response team
[6:03:50] director for dc safe d.c. Safe is an integral part of the
[6:03:53] city's public safety infrastructure, providing 24
[6:03:56] seven crisis intervention for domestic violence survivors in
[6:03:58] the district. We provide a critical bridge to
[6:04:01] safety for survivors who have interacted with police.
[6:04:03] with over 13,000 of our referrals to our crisis response
[6:04:06] line coming from mpd officers responding to domestic violence
[6:04:10] incidents. In addition, mpd is an essential
[6:04:12] partner in the lethality assessment project and the
[6:04:15] domestic violence system review. Mpd efforts to connect survivors
[6:04:18] in a moment of crisis and vulnerability and their
[6:04:21] engagement in uplifting the needs of survivors at the
[6:04:23] highest risk of serious harm and homicide, are a vital part of
[6:04:27] the high risk domestic violence initiative and a valuable tool
[6:04:30] to overall survivors safety. Further, their participation in
[6:04:33] the domestic violence system review helps elevate the most at
[6:04:36] risk cases and consider how to address critical gaps in
[6:04:40] addressing domestic violence in the district.
[6:04:42] mpd continues to be a valuable and collaborative partner in our
[6:04:45] joint efforts to promote safety for survivors.
[6:04:48] however, while we remain thankful for the partnership we
[6:04:50] maintain with mpd, we know there are opportunities for
[6:04:53] improvement and have consistently made
[6:04:55] recommendations for many years, such as better data gathering
[6:04:58] and analysis on dv calls for service, a more robust and
[6:05:02] consistent dv unit, expectations for leadership assigned dv
[6:05:07] responsibilities, and a better access for information for
[6:05:11] officers who are on the scene of dv calls.
[6:05:17] a comprehensive and targeted approach to chronic and
[6:05:19] persistent. Develop the capacity for great
[6:05:24] collaboration both within and outside the public safety
[6:05:27] cluster. We've shared those
[6:05:28] recommendations with mpd leadership, your office, the
[6:05:32] cdjc, and testimony for the deputy mayor for public safety
[6:05:35] and justice. And in past performance,
[6:05:37] oversight and budget testimony. We continue to urge the
[6:05:40] committee of public safety and mpd to consider how to move
[6:05:42] forward with these recommendations.
[6:05:44] we recognize that there may be resource constraints that impact
[6:05:47] things like creating a more robust dv unit, but
[6:05:49] recommendations like reevaluating data for calls for
[6:05:52] service, or how frequent calls for service are tracked seem
[6:05:54] like they are within reach. If there is a commitment to
[6:05:57] improving mpd and the city's response to dv, even simply
[6:06:01] publicly reporting crime statistics related to dv in line
[6:06:03] with reporting sexual assault data would be a start.
[6:06:05] as we have mentioned in other testimony, there has been a
[6:06:09] shift in attention to and the city's response to domestic
[6:06:12] violence, and we welcome that focus.
[6:06:14] but we want to uplift that. There is a strong foundation,
[6:06:17] particularly in the work of the high risk domestic violence
[6:06:20] initiative and existing pilots and recommendations for an
[6:06:22] innovative approach for these efforts to be successful, there
[6:06:25] needs to be thoughtful consideration, but also a
[6:06:28] sustained commitment of both will and resources.
[6:06:31] we also believe strongly that investing in a smart approach to
[6:06:35] policing and the city's overall approach to dv pays dividends
[6:06:38] over time, both in cost savings and community safety.
[6:06:41] thank you for your time and we look forward to any questions.
[6:06:46] thank you very much. I want to call eva millstone,
[6:06:50] who's here in person. I understand.
[6:06:55] great. Welcome.
[6:06:56] please go ahead whenever you're ready.
[6:07:15] the mic is red. Is it on?
[6:07:18] oh good afternoon, chair pinto and members of the committee.
[6:07:21] my name is eva millstone. I'm a ward six resident, a dcfs
[6:07:25] parent, and the granddaughter of holocaust survivors.
[6:07:29] last june, I warned this committee that the fy 26 budget
[6:07:32] echoed the authoritarian threats my ancestors faced.
[6:07:35] I said then that it was my sacred duty to try to protect
[6:07:38] the victims of today. Today, my witness that those
[6:07:41] threats are taking root in our city.
[6:07:43] every morning in southwest, my children see the national guard
[6:07:45] on their way to school. Our city's children are
[6:07:48] absorbing the tension of this city.
[6:07:50] the sirens masked federal agents, the normalization of
[6:07:53] occupation. This is a theft of their
[6:07:55] childhood. I see our mpd officers as
[6:07:58] neighbors. My family mourned with the first
[6:08:00] district when we lost. Officer terry bennett and I
[6:08:02] cheered the dozens of officers who cold plunged alongside my
[6:08:05] kids for the special olympics last weekend.
[6:08:08] I've shown up to first district meetings to brainstorm
[6:08:10] solutions. Because this is the mpd.
[6:08:11] we strive for a community agency rooted in oversight and
[6:08:16] relationship. But after the navy yard incident
[6:08:18] on halloween, where our children were chased by military units
[6:08:21] with guns less than a mile from my house, I saw how easily that
[6:08:25] neighborly bond is shattered by federal entanglement.
[6:08:27] federal agents are unnamed, unreachable, and unaccountable.
[6:08:31] the so-called d.c. Safe and beautiful task force has eroded
[6:08:34] the trust mpd needs to function. In recent months, federal agents
[6:08:38] have opened fire during mpd operations, shooting philip
[6:08:42] bailey and justin brian nelson and killing julian bailey, the
[6:08:45] father and son of the city who we mourn when an mpd supervisor
[6:08:50] instructs an officer to omit a federal shooting from a report.
[6:08:53] transparency is destroyed. Without transparency, there's no
[6:08:57] democracy. This is a home rule crisis.
[6:08:59] just as federal urban renewal once raised my neighborhood of
[6:09:02] southwest against the will of black and the black and jewish
[6:09:05] community, federal public safety is now reshaping our city from
[6:09:08] the inside without our consent. Today, a historic coalition is
[6:09:12] rising. As a jewish mom, I'm proud to
[6:09:15] ally with free d.c. And harriet's wildest dreams to cry
[6:09:17] out for justice. We're watching our sanctuary
[6:09:20] city become a trap. Immigrants and friends I've
[6:09:23] hosted in my home now refuse to enter d.c.
[6:09:26] they stay in maryland because of routine traffic.
[6:09:27] stop here has become an ice pipeline due to the loophole in
[6:09:30] our sanctuary values act. Chair pinto, the safe community,
[6:09:36] places and policing amendment act has been sitting since
[6:09:39] december. Families cannot wait for
[6:09:41] political timing. We're living in fear today.
[6:09:43] I'm asking you directly, as a mother, to schedule a hearing
[6:09:46] without delay. I urge this committee to close
[6:09:49] the sanctuary values act loophole immediately require
[6:09:53] full transparency, prohibit face coverings for federal officers,
[6:09:55] and require full public identification mandate reporting
[6:09:59] every officer present at an arrest, local or federal, must
[6:10:02] be named in an official report. I also oppose any appointment of
[6:10:05] jeffrey carroll as permanent mpd chief.
[6:10:08] I ask you to do the same. D.c. Needs our officers to be on
[6:10:11] the side of our communities and our democracy.
[6:10:14] carroll's aggressive tactics are the opposite.
[6:10:17] accountability and compassion are not opposites.
[6:10:20] transparency strengthens. Strengthens trust.
[6:10:22] choose our neighbors. Choose oversight.
[6:10:24] choose autonomy. Thank you.
[6:10:27] thank you very much. Austin rose, public witness.
[6:10:36] thank you. Chair pinto.
[6:10:38] my name is austin rose. I'm a long time d.c. Resident,
[6:10:41] and I'm currently the managing attorney at the mca center for
[6:10:44] immigrant rights, which is a nonprofit organization that
[6:10:48] represents our detained immigrant neighbors.
[6:10:50] in that capacity, I am leading class action litigation in the
[6:10:53] d.c. Federal court. Escobar, molina versus dhs that
[6:10:57] has challenged warrantless immigration arrests in our city
[6:11:00] and secured a permanent injunction to summer that has
[6:11:02] reduced those arrests. But through that litigation, I
[6:11:06] have learned of several specific concerning examples of mpd
[6:11:12] collaboration with ice. I want to highlight two of those
[6:11:15] examples, one of which happened in december 2025 and january
[6:11:19] 2026. So very recently attached to my
[6:11:22] testimony, which is public on the website, are the
[6:11:25] declarations and the arrest reports of these two
[6:11:28] individuals, which are already public through the litigation.
[6:11:30] and I encourage you to read these are unequivocal examples.
[6:11:34] in addition, a washington post article was just published today
[6:11:37] outlining these two stories. First is jose argueta, who has
[6:11:41] lived in the united states for more than two decades.
[6:11:45] in november 2025, mr. Argueta reported his car stolen to the
[6:11:50] police in december, someone purporting to be d.c. Police
[6:11:55] called him and instructed him to come into the mpd station.
[6:11:58] the fifth district station at 1805 bladensburg road.
[6:12:01] and you can see that right on the ice.
[6:12:03] arrest report. Mr. Argueta arrived at the
[6:12:07] station and inside an mpd station, ice agents,
[6:12:13] specifically hcy agents, which part of ice arrested him.
[6:12:17] and one of the officers later revealed that they had used a
[6:12:20] stolen vehicle. Report that his his report that
[6:12:23] his car had been stolen to track him down and to lure him to the
[6:12:28] station and months the next month at various ice detention
[6:12:33] facilities before he was thankfully released on bond,
[6:12:35] which is rare. This is an incredibly troubling
[6:12:38] incident that violated clearly one or more provisions of the
[6:12:43] sanctuary values act, namely section 74, b and c, in that
[6:12:48] mpd. Apparently provided to ice an
[6:12:51] individual's personal identifying information and or
[6:12:54] granted ice access to a district detention facility or place.
[6:12:58] there's also a second example which I don't have time to
[6:13:01] cover, but I'm raising this to make clear that there's been
[6:13:05] lots of suggestions about new legislation we can pass, and I
[6:13:07] applaud those efforts in the future.
[6:13:09] but right now, what the d.c. Council can do and what you
[6:13:11] chair pinto can do is focus on enforcing the law we already
[6:13:15] have, which doesn't need congressional approval.
[6:13:17] this is fully under our control, and that law needs to be
[6:13:21] implemented. These examples were not
[6:13:23] loopholes in the sanctuary values act.
[6:13:24] they were blatant defiance of the sanctuary values act.
[6:13:27] they were examples of our city authorities actively
[6:13:31] facilitating an ice arrest, someone who would not have been
[6:13:34] an ice custody absent collaboration.
[6:13:36] that's unacceptable and it must end.
[6:13:38] so I encourage the council to act with vigorous oversight,
[6:13:41] including questions of the mpd chief later today.
[6:13:43] thank you. Thank you very much, sir rose,
[6:13:50] and we certainly will be asking those questions.
[6:13:56] brendan jackson, public witness. Good afternoon, chair pinto and
[6:14:01] committee members. My name is brandon jackson and I
[6:14:03] live in ward three. I'm testifying today to voice my
[6:14:07] concern over how mpd makes our city less safe for those who
[6:14:10] live, work, and visit, wasting limited resources that could be
[6:14:15] more effectively used. Increasing safety through
[6:14:17] meeting community needs. With my limited time, I would
[6:14:19] like to focus on mpd's continued collaboration with federal
[6:14:24] agencies, enabled by this government's inaction.
[6:14:28] since returning to d.c. Control, mpd has been involved in at
[6:14:31] least three shootings by federal agencies in their continued
[6:14:34] support of the harassment and abduction of community members,
[6:14:38] and committed two murders of their own.
[6:14:41] mpd refuses transparency and lies about the violence they
[6:14:44] commit and abet. This council has been passive,
[6:14:47] going only so far as toothless letter writing giving up when
[6:14:51] told to pound sand by a department whose purse strings
[6:14:54] they hold. If the council is concerned that
[6:14:56] pushing back on trump will threaten home rule, have they
[6:14:59] not learned that trump cannot be appeased through concessions?
[6:15:03] I would further ask of what use is the power to self-govern if
[6:15:06] we refuse to use it to protect our community?
[6:15:10] while the council has limited control over federal agencies
[6:15:13] operating in the district, it is in their power to stop using our
[6:15:17] resources to help them violate our rights and harm our
[6:15:19] neighbors. The obvious place to start would
[6:15:22] be to end all collaboration with federal agencies in their
[6:15:26] kidnaping spree. That means no more mpd making
[6:15:29] arrests for ice, no more resource sharing, and no more
[6:15:33] information sharing. Without a warrant.
[6:15:35] the council should also get creative and learn from other
[6:15:38] jurisdictions to further limit and challenge federal agencies
[6:15:41] where they can. The council should use their
[6:15:44] powers under the sanctuary values act to release data on
[6:15:48] how many people have been abducted, the conditions they're
[6:15:51] held under and the sorry they're held under, and the information
[6:15:58] and assistance requested by and shared with feds.
[6:16:01] mpd should no longer be allowed to hide the identities of the
[6:16:05] agents they have been supporting, and officers who
[6:16:07] commit violence and abuse power. I ask the council to reject the
[6:16:11] appointment of jeffrey carroll as police chief.
[6:16:14] as assistant chief, he oversaw a culture of white supremacy and
[6:16:18] sexism, and his interim chief. He has continued collaborating
[6:16:20] with feds and withholding information.
[6:16:23] I would also like to raise the alarm over mpd's acquisition of
[6:16:28] surveillance technologies. You wouldn't want a stranger
[6:16:30] going through your phone or following you down the street,
[6:16:33] and the only way to ensure this data is not abused by mpd or
[6:16:37] anyone else, is to not collect it in the first place.
[6:16:40] while our city fails to meet the material, educational and social
[6:16:43] needs of our neighbors, it cannot be safe supporting a
[6:16:47] cruel project in a vain attempt to appease a wannabe dictator
[6:16:51] can only make us less safe. Yeah.
[6:16:55] thank you, mr. Jackson. Virginia spatz to patrick burke,
[6:17:02] executive director of the dc police foundation.
[6:17:07] were you calling? This is virginia spatz.
[6:17:09] did you call me or someone else? I did, I'm sorry.
[6:17:11] I didn't see you. Virginia spatz, public witness.
[6:17:14] please go ahead, and then we'll turn to you.
[6:17:16] mr. Burke. Okay.
[6:17:18] as I, I am virginia spatz. I have lived for nearly 40 years
[6:17:23] in ward six and worked over the years and served as a freelance
[6:17:27] reporter in other parts of the city.
[6:17:30] my testimony, the written submission, and this kind of
[6:17:33] condensed version is informed by that background as well as by
[6:17:37] the work of d.c. Justice lab free dc project, harriet's
[6:17:41] wildest dreams, and other experts on issues of judiciary
[6:17:45] and policing. However, I am speaking for
[6:17:48] myself. I am more worried for my
[6:17:51] neighbors than for myself or my spouse.
[6:17:55] despite my privileges in interacting or avoiding law
[6:18:01] enforcement, however, I have been impacted deeply by the
[6:18:06] cooperation of our city's police department with federal law
[6:18:10] enforcement agencies. I feel far less safe on our
[6:18:14] streets and in the metro than in the 40 years before, and I am
[6:18:19] now afraid to call police for any reason.
[6:18:22] I call on this committee and the council to move beyond tepid
[6:18:26] responses and stand up for the needs and rights of the
[6:18:30] district. The district has always been at
[6:18:32] the mercy of national politics, in which we have little say.
[6:18:36] the president's creation of that dc safe and beautiful task force
[6:18:41] last march is one example, and trump's declaration of that
[6:18:45] crime emergency in august is another.
[6:18:48] recruitment for the dc task force, which, on asking people
[6:18:54] to apply to become part of it, is really terrifying.
[6:18:57] it dehumanizes urban residents here and around the country,
[6:19:01] while encouraging applicants to join the agency of your dreams
[6:19:05] like they were engaging in some sort of violent role playing
[6:19:10] game. This has disturbing and deadly
[6:19:13] consequences. The task force has brought
[6:19:15] shootings, automobile chases, and threats to young people into
[6:19:18] the district. In addition, we are now grieving
[6:19:22] five black men whose deaths are directly linked to the safe and
[6:19:26] beautiful task force or to place within that context, julian
[6:19:31] bailey, aaron williams, david childs, demetrius alston and
[6:19:36] kevin booker. The federal government is not
[6:19:39] solely to blame for the multi-agency incursion into our
[6:19:43] neighborhoods. However, our own metropolitan
[6:19:46] police department, including interim chief carroll, has
[6:19:49] actively supported the task force.
[6:19:50] mayor bowser's own order normalized and applauded it.
[6:19:53] and this council and this committee in action and inaction
[6:19:58] has further endangered the district.
[6:20:01] while the dc while dc sovereignty is limited in some
[6:20:05] ways, the council does have the power to restrict how federal
[6:20:09] agents operate. Here.
[6:20:11] I join in calling for specific restrictions and to enact the
[6:20:16] full accountability and arrest reporting emergency amendment
[6:20:20] act of 2026 and also join in asking you to refuse to make
[6:20:26] jeffrey carroll's appointment permanent.
[6:20:28] while many in our city do mourn and organize in the face of
[6:20:32] growing loss of life and dire threat to public safety, many
[6:20:37] others, including leaders, have been supporting and normalizing
[6:20:41] egregious attacks on our city's well-being.
[6:20:43] we need you to take steps available to you and take them
[6:20:46] now. Thank you.
[6:20:47] thank you. Patrick burke, executive
[6:20:51] director of dc police foundation.
[6:20:55] good afternoon, chairwoman pinto and members of the committee.
[6:20:57] I'm patrick burke, and just quickly, the dc police
[6:21:02] foundation was formed to bring together business, professional,
[6:21:06] civic, nonprofit organizations and individuals to promote
[6:21:08] public safety by providing financial and in-kind resources
[6:21:13] to the chief of police and mpd. Our goal is to make washington,
[6:21:18] dc a safer place to live, work, and visit for everyone, and I
[6:21:22] appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today.
[6:21:25] I've been watching the entire testimony, and I appreciate the
[6:21:30] passion, and I know there's a lot of conflict, especially with
[6:21:34] increased federal intervention in the city.
[6:21:37] as retired assistant chief for mpd and the former u.s. Marshal
[6:21:40] for dc, I've served in a law enforcement capacity for over
[6:21:44] half my life, and I'm honored to work with chief carroll and our
[6:21:48] community to continue to serve and working to make our city
[6:21:52] safer. And first of all, I want to say
[6:21:54] I've submitted my testimony, so I'm going to deviate from that.
[6:21:57] and a lot of the work that we do and the police foundation is
[6:22:01] working with youth and especially keeping minority
[6:22:04] youth out of the criminal justice system, working with mpd
[6:22:07] officers. And one of the biggest
[6:22:09] challenges has been with the decreased staffing is fewer
[6:22:13] officers to work on caseloads for detectives to spend time
[6:22:17] with, youth to spend time with victims, and that that takes
[6:22:20] away from a lot of the community empowering activities that mpd
[6:22:24] officers have. So we we strongly encourage full
[6:22:28] staffing of the mpd and working to retain these officers that we
[6:22:33] work so hard to bring into mpd. We train them and then
[6:22:38] unfortunately, we're losing so many to other agencies.
[6:22:40] but with my brief amount of time beyond talking through the
[6:22:44] programs that we offer with mpd, I want to just say to the
[6:22:49] officers and obviously for people watching today, it's not
[6:22:51] a great recruiting video. And first of all, I know when
[6:22:56] d.c. With opc, internal affairs and a number of avenues, if
[6:23:00] people feel that they're treated unfairly by mpd and I've seen
[6:23:03] this around the country, around the world, there are many
[6:23:07] avenues to pursue. If you have a complaint.
[6:23:09] there's a lot of anecdotal stories out here, but if you
[6:23:12] have a complaint, come forward, make it and people will be dealt
[6:23:15] with. And we absolutely want anyone
[6:23:17] held accountable. And I also want to say thank you
[6:23:20] to all the police officers if you're watching this, it's a
[6:23:23] tough hearing to watch, but I want to thank you, the men and
[6:23:27] women that are out there every day putting your lives on the
[6:23:29] line. I want to thank the widow and
[6:23:33] the son of terry bennett, who we lost recently in mpd, and I know
[6:23:37] the dangerous work that that you men and women are doing every
[6:23:40] single day. And I want to thank you and let
[6:23:43] you know that I appreciate you. And there's a whole lot of
[6:23:47] people throughout dc and beyond that appreciate the work you do.
[6:23:50] god bless and be safe. Thank you, mr. Burke.
[6:23:57] karen gall, chairwoman and public safety director of three
[6:24:01] dcc third district citizens advisory council.
[6:24:06] can you hear me? I'm.
[6:24:08] I guess we can. Okay.
[6:24:11] good afternoon, chairwoman pinto.
[6:24:13] my name is karen gall. I am the third district citizens
[6:24:18] advisory council chairwoman and public safety director, and also
[6:24:25] anc 105 committeewoman serving here in ward one.
[6:24:33] I have a cold, so bear with me for 45 years, three dcac has
[6:24:37] been on the organizing community voice for approximately 180,000
[6:24:42] residents across eight police service areas in the third
[6:24:45] district. Public safety is only as strong
[6:24:48] as the community infrastructure, supporting it.
[6:24:52] enforcement matters, accountability matters, and data
[6:24:55] matters, but enforcement alone cannot close the trust gap, and
[6:24:58] it cannot sustain safety. When community confidence is
[6:25:04] weakened. We acknowledge the reported 29%
[6:25:07] decrease in violent crime, that progress matters, and we
[6:25:11] appreciate the work behind it. But progress is fragile.
[6:25:15] when federal interference, unclear coordination, and
[6:25:20] inconsistent communications erode trust at the neighborhood
[6:25:23] level. When trust is damaged, bonds are
[6:25:26] broken. People hesitate to report
[6:25:28] witnesses. Go quiet, victims disengage, and
[6:25:31] businesses lose confidence. Chairperson pinto the bill you
[6:25:36] introduced yesterday is is just what our communities need.
[6:25:39] it reflects what residents have been saying in our meetings and
[6:25:43] on our block. Three dcac has documented 47
[6:25:47] incidents involving mpd and federal court effect and federal
[6:25:52] coordination affecting civil rights in our communities.
[6:25:55] these are not abstract numbers. Behind each incident is a
[6:25:59] resident, family or business owner who no longer knows
[6:26:02] whether calling for help will lead to protection, confusion or
[6:26:06] harm. That is why we're here.
[6:26:09] three dcc is bringing concern, documentation and organized
[6:26:14] community evidence. We are your evidence and we are
[6:26:17] your implementation partner to who?
[6:26:19] and because we believe in community policing for mpd, we
[6:26:24] respectfully urge five actions. First, expedite the permanent
[6:26:28] chief appointment by q2 2026. Also, because we need to have
[6:26:34] stable leadership and it strengthens the accountability
[6:26:37] and public confidence. Second, published a protocol
[6:26:40] required under section 740 because residents and partners
[6:26:44] deserve a clear standard for how coordination works.
[6:26:48] third, fund block captain training for fy 2026 because
[6:26:53] prevention and readiness at the block level reduces calls, it
[6:26:57] rebuilds trust for service and it stabilizes the corridors.
[6:27:01] fourth fund, a pastoral clergy coalition for replication
[6:27:05] because trusted messengers help prevent escalation and restore
[6:27:10] trust after incidents. Fifth, require clear
[6:27:14] identification and complete arrest documentation when
[6:27:17] federal officers operate in dc. Because transparency is the
[6:27:21] foundation of lawful coordination, federal officers
[6:27:24] should should follow mpd public identification rules.
[6:27:29] mpd reports should list every officer from every agency
[6:27:33] present, and mpd should not coordinate enforcement in
[6:27:37] sensitive locations like schools, health care facilities.
[6:27:40] yes, ma'am. You're over time.
[6:27:43] sorry. Thank you.
[6:27:45] thank you very much. Edward daniels here.
[6:27:53] edna boone. Hey.
[6:27:57] have you heard from naima konate, youth leader, d.c. Girls
[6:28:03] coalition and youth for justice. Good afternoon.
[6:28:11] my name is naima and I'm here representing d.c. Coalition and
[6:28:16] youth for justice. I live in ward four, and when I
[6:28:21] walk around my community, I should be able to feel safe
[6:28:24] without fear of being intimidated.
[6:28:26] no one should have to worry about being stopped or
[6:28:29] questioned by federal agents or ice, along with all the other
[6:28:33] law enforcement agencies currently occupying d.c.
[6:28:36] I should be able to walk with my friends without being profiled
[6:28:40] or harassed. Everyone deserves to feel secure
[6:28:43] in their own community, regardless of who they are or
[6:28:46] what they look like. As a lifelong washingtonian, I
[6:28:50] have both the right and responsibility to speak out
[6:28:53] against the injustices in my city, especially when they
[6:28:57] impact you. Young people should be able to
[6:28:59] leave their homes freely and enjoy public spaces without
[6:29:02] fear. They should.
[6:29:04] they should have the right to gather with their friends, walk
[6:29:06] in groups, and express themselves without being
[6:29:08] unfairly targeted. As a member of the young people
[6:29:11] in washington, d.c., we deserve. We deserve opportunities to grow
[6:29:15] outside of our homes without being met with suspicion or
[6:29:18] hostility. We need to build a community
[6:29:21] where young people, as well as others, feel safe.
[6:29:24] and safety is not only is not determined by their appearance,
[6:29:28] age, or background. Instead of increased law
[6:29:31] enforcement presence, we should invest in support for youth, not
[6:29:36] violence, by empowering young people and fostering trust, we
[6:29:38] can create a city where everyone feels safe and valued.
[6:29:42] thank you. Thank you very much, rebecca
[6:29:48] gordon. Yes.
[6:29:51] hello, chair pinto and committee members.
[6:29:53] my name is rebecca gordon. I live in ward one and I'm
[6:29:56] testifying today about mpd's collaboration with ice and other
[6:30:00] federal police and reducing overpolicing and unnecessary
[6:30:04] surveillance. My testimony is informed by my
[6:30:06] direct observation in my community and my many years of
[6:30:10] work on violence as a public health issue, both I and my
[6:30:14] neighbors have seen mpd collaborate with federal police,
[6:30:18] including irs, dhs, secret service, and the dea.
[6:30:22] these agents show up en masse to mpd.
[6:30:24] calls are on their own for nonviolent calls and minor
[6:30:27] issues such as transit stops harassing unhoused people and
[6:30:32] metro enforcement. They kidnap our neighbors and
[6:30:35] attack bystanders. The collaboration targets the
[6:30:37] most marginalized and criminalized, making dc less
[6:30:40] safe. It decreases community trust in
[6:30:44] mpd and the kidnapings of over 1000 dc neighbors by ice and the
[6:30:48] killing of julian bailey and others are the horrific and
[6:30:52] racist results I have other written testimony that I will
[6:30:57] submit, but I want to use some of my time to address the
[6:31:00] guesstimated number of complaints that was shared by
[6:31:04] interim mpd chief carroll today, limited police complaints
[6:31:08] certainly do not reflect the extent of the harms ranging from
[6:31:11] harassment and general decreased safety to kidnapings
[6:31:14] disappearances and killings. I know from my experience with
[6:31:18] complaints reporting systems for gender based violence and
[6:31:20] violence against children, as well as violence in communities,
[6:31:23] that violence is always underreported.
[6:31:26] this is particularly true for institutional systems, including
[6:31:30] reporting of violence by the police, distrust of reporting
[6:31:33] systems, and the institutions that manage them also decrease
[6:31:36] reporting. Even the increased complaints to
[6:31:39] mpd discussed at the outset of this hearing will not reflect
[6:31:42] the extent to which community members are experiencing,
[6:31:45] observing and raising complaints about mpd in public or the
[6:31:48] violence they are experiencing. If a dc citizen is harassed by
[6:31:53] mpd or an officer. Threatens to turn her over to
[6:31:58] ice, who is she going to report to?
[6:31:59] will she trust the police to investigate?
[6:32:02] if I observe ice with mpd and the city government has done
[6:32:05] nothing, why would I report ice to a police mechanism?
[6:32:09] as we have heard already, is particularly likely to
[6:32:12] immigrants, unhoused people, black people and survivors of
[6:32:15] domestic violence and sexual violence will fear reporting.
[6:32:18] calling these stories anecdotal is minimizing when there are
[6:32:22] already more reports in this hearing than noted at the
[6:32:24] outset. As karen gall and others have
[6:32:27] noted, the violence dc residents experience goes far, far beyond
[6:32:31] this and must be stopped. Federal police unnecessarily
[6:32:35] joining mpd and the collaboration has been a waste
[6:32:38] of funds that promotes unnecessary stops and arrests,
[6:32:42] disappearances and violence. It increases institutionalized
[6:32:46] pathways for violence against immigrants, criminalization and
[6:32:49] transference to ice, and promotes an unsafe city.
[6:32:53] I echo the request of d.c., harriet's wildest dreams and
[6:32:57] others about reducing federal collaboration and mpd oversight
[6:33:00] in general, ending the collaboration with the safe and
[6:33:03] beautiful task force, not confirming interim police chief
[6:33:07] carroll and enforcement of the sanctuary values act, including
[6:33:11] officers, federal officers working with mpd and operating
[6:33:14] in the city needing to show personal identification.
[6:33:18] thank you for your time. Thank you.
[6:33:21] mariah burke rains, public witness.
[6:33:27] chair, pinto and members of the committee.
[6:33:29] thank you for allowing me to testify today.
[6:33:31] my name is maria burke. I'm a native washingtonian, a
[6:33:34] ten year resident of ward five, and a supporter of harriet's
[6:33:37] wildest dreams. I'm here because I'm deeply
[6:33:40] concerned about mpd's collaboration with federal law
[6:33:44] enforcement agencies, and I want you to take immediate action.
[6:33:46] we know that allowing mpd to learn from and coordinate with
[6:33:50] trump's federal detention machine has created an
[6:33:54] incredibly dangerous situation for our people.
[6:33:56] it puts us all, but especially black people, brown people, and
[6:34:00] people who are immigrants in daily mortal danger.
[6:34:03] mpd and trump's federal officers are showing up around the city
[6:34:07] in large numbers and full force, intimidating washingtonians,
[6:34:11] making a show of arrests, kidnaping people and killing
[6:34:14] people. They're ignoring the law, lying
[6:34:16] about incidents and refusing to take accountability.
[6:34:19] since the occupation began, I have spent my mornings and
[6:34:23] afternoons holding the broken hearts of two children,
[6:34:25] navigating the trauma of their father's kidnaping and long term
[6:34:30] detention by ice. I've seen mpd, fbi, and homeland
[6:34:34] security in tactical gear all show up for a single person
[6:34:37] having a medical emergency. I've seen fbi deploy flash bang
[6:34:41] grenades during a traffic stop, as if washingtonians are enemy
[6:34:45] combatants. I feared for my children's
[6:34:47] school community as ice targets teachers and families on their
[6:34:50] way to school. I've watched the lockup list at
[6:34:52] the d.c. Jail surge to over 100 people almost daily, and I've
[6:34:56] watched with horror as children celebrating halloween were
[6:35:00] chased, terrorized and arrested by national guard and mpd and
[6:35:02] navy yard. We have collectively mourned
[6:35:06] julian bailey, a beloved father and husband murdered in dc by
[6:35:10] u.s. Marshals just two weeks ago.
[6:35:12] and we've mourned kevin booker, demetrius alston and darren
[6:35:16] warren childs all loved community community members who
[6:35:19] either died in mpd custody or were shot and killed by mpd in
[6:35:22] november. The horrors are truly endless,
[6:35:26] both on the surface of it and at its core.
[6:35:27] we're talking about a deliberate fascist advancement of state
[6:35:32] sanctioned violence against d.c. People.
[6:35:34] we're talking about the psychological torture, physical
[6:35:37] brutalization and murder of black, black and brown folks.
[6:35:40] and that's the inescapable truth of it.
[6:35:42] I do not accept for a second that this is a necessary
[6:35:45] reality, and I do not accept that you are powerless to
[6:35:47] mitigate it. I understand that this council
[6:35:50] doesn't control federal agencies, but there are many
[6:35:52] steps that you can take to limit how mpd assists federal agents,
[6:35:56] which others have already laid out today and which are included
[6:35:58] in my written testimony. I also implore you to reject the
[6:36:03] appointment of jeffrey carroll as mpd chief.
[6:36:05] he's a known white supremacist apologist and a grave, grave
[6:36:08] danger to our community. Washingtonians are going to
[6:36:12] continue to protect one another from militarized police in our
[6:36:15] communities. While mayor bowser has sold out
[6:36:17] to fascist dictates, you still have a great number of ways to
[6:36:20] stand in solidarity with the people.
[6:36:23] stop complying in advance, and do not cede any more ground.
[6:36:27] otherwise, trump's fascist regime will know that their
[6:36:29] power here is free to go unchecked.
[6:36:32] thank you for your time. Thank you.
[6:36:37] kristi matthews, kristy matthews jones yes, I'm here.
[6:36:44] please go ahead. Good afternoon, council member
[6:36:48] pinto and members of the judiciary committee.
[6:36:50] my name is kristi matthews jones, and I'm the director of
[6:36:53] dc girls coalition. Dc girls coalition works to
[6:36:56] elevate and amplify the voices of young girls of color, women
[6:36:59] of color, and gender nonconforming people of color in
[6:37:03] dc. Composed of youth serving
[6:37:06] organizations and advocacy, we are led by our youth advisory
[6:37:09] board, made up of young girls and gender nonconforming people
[6:37:11] of color. Today, I will speak about some
[6:37:13] of the concerns we've heard from young people about mpd and
[6:37:17] overpolicing of young people of color.
[6:37:19] there has been an increase in interactions between police
[6:37:22] officers and young people since the city implemented youth
[6:37:25] curfews and more aggressive manner.
[6:37:29] 127 young people were taken to is due to the juvenile curfew.
[6:37:33] young people have been targeted and harassed for simply trying
[6:37:36] to get home from school, work, programing and or events.
[6:37:39] this has led to a distrust of police officers among young
[6:37:44] people. We often hear about police, how
[6:37:48] police should be seen as resources, but unfortunately for
[6:37:53] many young people, they are a source of great pain and
[6:37:56] distress and we need to be creating space for young people
[6:37:59] to grow, learn and develop into adults who can lead the world.
[6:38:04] instead, we're making investments into targeting,
[6:38:07] criminalizing and intimidating young people in very harmful
[6:38:12] ways. Last august, when the youth
[6:38:18] curfew was implemented, dc girls coalition, along with many other
[6:38:24] organizations, created safe spaces and had held various
[6:38:27] meetings with young people to express what their concerns
[6:38:30] were. We held a youth assembly where
[6:38:33] we had over 40 young people come together with grave concerns
[6:38:37] about the overpolicing that they had already been experienced and
[6:38:39] the increase that they were going to be experiencing with
[6:38:42] the new curfew and the hot zones.
[6:38:44] our young people talked a lot about being harassed, just
[6:38:48] simply walking through the neighborhood, trying to get home
[6:38:51] feeling very unsafe, feeling very targeted, and the safe
[6:38:57] spaces that we held were opportunity for them to feel
[6:39:00] safe being and experience joy turning.
[6:39:03] being under 18 into a crime directly impacts young people's
[6:39:08] ability to develop in who they are.
[6:39:09] I know I'm running out of time and I will submit my written
[6:39:12] testimony. I just want to say in closing,
[6:39:15] that we need to stop making investments in criminalizing
[6:39:18] young people, and we need to start making investments into
[6:39:21] creating resources and programing for them to address
[6:39:23] whatever needs they might need. If we continue to teach young
[6:39:26] people that they are, quote unquote the problem, then that's
[6:39:29] going to be what the society that we create.
[6:39:31] I've worked with young people for a lot of years.
[6:39:34] I've held multiple events, and my experience has always been
[6:39:37] that young people are the future, and they do have the
[6:39:41] ability to see things through. We need to create the
[6:39:44] opportunity for them to do that, and we are very concerned about
[6:39:47] the national guard and the overpolicing that we're seeing
[6:39:49] in d.c. I know I'm over time, so I will
[6:39:52] end there, and I welcome any questions.
[6:40:02] thank you very much. That concludes our public
[6:40:07] witnesses for today's hearing. I want to thank you all very
[6:40:11] much for being here today, both those of you who are in person
[6:40:15] and online, and for submitting your written testimony and being
[6:40:18] a part of this process. I know there's a lot of feeling
[6:40:23] of fear and frustration and want to just thank you all for and
[6:40:28] anger, and thank you all for sharing your stories, your
[6:40:32] perspectives, your ideas. Those ideas have shaped a lot of
[6:40:36] the questions that we've been able to ask mpd, the legislation
[6:40:39] that I introduced yesterday, came directly from the hearing
[6:40:43] that we had from public witnesses about their
[6:40:47] experiences in december. So thank you for being part of
[6:40:50] the process, and we will continue our effort.
[6:40:55] I'm going to call our government witnesses now.
[6:41:00] interim mpd chief jeffrey carroll and team, you all can
[6:41:06] come in. If I can ask folks, I think
[6:41:08] there are some available chairs if we're able to try to provide
[6:41:13] a row for mpd team, as they may be assisting in answering
[6:41:18] questions for our government witnesses, that would be
[6:41:21] helpful. There's still room in the flow
[6:41:23] over space as well, but there's some seats over here.
[6:41:26] there's some seats in the back. There.
[6:41:31] yep, that's all. Good.
[6:41:39] so absolutely no. I'll be.
[6:41:42] so we got this all that because we need to make some room for
[6:41:48] our government witnesses who are here to testify.
[6:41:51] and thanks to all the community organizers across dc.
[6:41:54] thank you all for coming. Thank you.
[6:41:57] thank you for coming. Thank you.
[6:41:59] thank you. Chief, is there anyone sitting
[6:42:07] up at the table with you? Okay.
[6:42:10] okay. Is everybody all our officers
[6:42:12] don't have seats yet. There's a seat over here.
[6:42:33] yeah. Okay.
[6:42:50] we're going to bring some chairs on the side.
[6:42:53] thank you so much, larry. And marquez.
[6:42:59] she's upstairs. So I came down here first.
[6:43:07] yeah. Okay, mpd folks, there's some
[6:44:15] extra chairs here. Are you sure?
[6:44:20] okay, how about here on the side?
[6:44:25] okay, okay. Well, thank you very much,
[6:44:29] chief, for being here. I want to also recognize we've
[6:44:31] been joined by my at large colleague, councilmember
[6:44:35] christina henderson. Thank you for joining us.
[6:44:37] and, chief, as you know, it is the tradition of this committee
[6:44:40] to swear in all government witnesses who appear before it.
[6:44:42] if you can, please turn on your microphone and raise your right
[6:44:45] hand. Do you swear or affirm under
[6:44:49] penalty of law that the testimony you're about to
[6:44:51] provide before this committee and the council of the district
[6:44:54] of columbia is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
[6:44:57] truth, I do great. Well, thank you very much for
[6:45:00] being here. And thank you to your entire
[6:45:02] team who's here and all of the hard working mpd officers who
[6:45:07] work throughout the year on behalf of the district of
[6:45:10] columbia. We appreciate all that.
[6:45:11] you all do. I'd like to invite you now to
[6:45:14] make any opening statement that you may have.
[6:45:16] thank you ma'am. Good afternoon, chairperson
[6:45:19] pinto, members of the committee, everyone here today and those
[6:45:23] watching remotely. My name is jeffrey carroll, and
[6:45:25] I'm the interim chief of police for the metropolitan police
[6:45:28] department. I'm honored and grateful that
[6:45:29] mayor bowser selected me to serve as the interim chief of
[6:45:32] police and to be here representing the department that
[6:45:34] I have served for over 23 years. I grew up in maryland, and I
[6:45:38] learned about mpd from my uncle, who also had a long career with
[6:45:41] mpd. I've served half my career in
[6:45:43] patrol in the first, third, and sixth districts and rose to the
[6:45:47] rank of commander for the third district.
[6:45:49] I've also worked in and led the special operations division, the
[6:45:52] homeland security bureau, the internal affairs bureau, most
[6:45:56] recently, I served as the executive assistant chief for
[6:45:59] specialized operations, overseeing homeland security,
[6:46:01] internal affairs, investigations, technical
[6:46:04] support and professional development.
[6:46:06] my experience with mpd has given me the opportunity to learn
[6:46:09] about this vibrant city, and about most every function in the
[6:46:12] department. One thing that I've learned is
[6:46:14] that mpd has two essential assets in our work to promote
[6:46:17] public safety in d.c., our engaged community members and
[6:46:21] dedicated employees. I appreciate all the community
[6:46:24] members who are active partners in public safety, whether
[6:46:26] they're attending meetings, joining mpd on community walks,
[6:46:30] emailing officials, or testifying before the council.
[6:46:33] I recognize that community members can and do have
[6:46:35] different visions and definitions of public safety.
[6:46:38] that's why it's important that we hear from our residents and
[6:46:41] businesses so we can continue to try to meet the different and
[6:46:44] sometimes competing visions. I look forward to working
[6:46:47] closely with the community, as well as our dc agencies and our
[6:46:50] elected city leaders to keep dc safe, strong and united.
[6:46:53] to the men and women of metropolitan police department,
[6:46:55] I'd like to say thank you. Your dedication,
[6:46:58] professionalism, and sacrifice were on prominent display as
[6:47:01] 2025 brought many demands to dc and the metropolitan police
[6:47:05] department from major events such as the 60th presidential
[6:47:08] inauguration, world pride dc and the us army 250th anniversary
[6:47:13] parade to the tragic mid-air collision of the army helicopter
[6:47:16] and the commercial plane over the potomac.
[6:47:19] mpd members have worked to support and protect dc through
[6:47:21] the good and the bad. This year, in the midst of this
[6:47:25] heavy workload, mpd and dc were able to reach several positive
[6:47:29] milestones. In 2025, violent crime fell 29%,
[6:47:32] including a 32% reduction in homicides to 127, the fewest
[6:47:37] since 2017. Fewer homicides allows our
[6:47:40] detectives to focus on their investigations, leading to an
[6:47:43] 85% homicide closure rate, the highest since 2011.
[6:47:47] the clearance rate for dc code index violent crimes increased
[6:47:50] 20 percentage points in two years.
[6:47:52] the number of people who were struck by gunfire decreased 35%.
[6:47:56] district roads were safer in 2025, with carjackings cut in
[6:48:00] half and traffic fatalities dropping to its lowest level
[6:48:03] since 2012. While these numbers are
[6:48:05] significant, what's really important is how it translates
[6:48:07] to lives saved and communities protected.
[6:48:10] compared to 2024, there were 60 fewer homicides and 27 fewer
[6:48:14] traffic fatalities. There were 253 fewer people shot
[6:48:17] in a crime in 2025. Hospitals reported similar to
[6:48:21] climb in firearm injury data, which helps to free up emergency
[6:48:24] rooms for other healthcare needs of the community.
[6:48:27] these improvements mean fewer families, fewer children
[6:48:30] impacted by violence. This is the progress in our
[6:48:33] communities that we must work together to sustain.
[6:48:36] this year, I will remain focused on combating crime and working
[6:48:38] with our community partners to support safe and thriving
[6:48:42] communities. While there were some notable
[6:48:44] successes in 2025, I wanted to highlight some concerning
[6:48:47] indicators for young people in dcc last year.
[6:48:49] although the number of people shot in the district fell by
[6:48:51] more than a third, there were six additional youth shot in
[6:48:55] 2025 when compared to 2024. Juvenile arrests for homicide
[6:48:59] and robbery decreased, but arrests for assault, arrest for
[6:49:02] assault with a dangerous weapon, aggravated assault, simple
[6:49:04] assault and illegal gun possession all increased.
[6:49:08] in addition, several communities experienced the negative impact
[6:49:11] of large groups of youth. Up to 100 or more participants
[6:49:14] intent on disruptive and sometimes criminal behavior.
[6:49:16] these were not just spontaneous gatherings with boisterous kids.
[6:49:20] the crowds were often promoted by social media postings for
[6:49:23] teen takeovers, encouraging attendees to bring their own
[6:49:26] alcohol and marijuana. The incidents include massive
[6:49:29] brawls running through businesses and restaurants,
[6:49:31] jumping on tables and damaging property.
[6:49:34] this was particularly dangerous when crowds were running through
[6:49:37] traffic and banging on cars. At least one youth was struck by
[6:49:40] a vehicle and one driver ended up in the hospital after he got
[6:49:43] out of the car and fought with the youth, residents and
[6:49:47] businesses alike in the affected areas voiced their alarm,
[6:49:49] prompting mayor bowser to propose emergency legislation
[6:49:52] and the council to enact a juvenile curfew.
[6:49:54] emergency amendment act. We appreciate the support from
[6:49:57] chair pinto and the council in responding quickly to this
[6:50:00] emerging challenge. The legislation expanded curfew
[6:50:04] ages and hours and authorized the chief of police to establish
[6:50:06] juvenile curfew zones. Former chief smith's use of
[6:50:09] these zones was limited, with 15 zones declared each lasting four
[6:50:13] days or less. No juveniles were arrested in a
[6:50:16] zone during the active hours from 8 to 11 p.m.
[6:50:20] most young people we encounter in the zones voluntarily comply
[6:50:22] with the law, either dispersing into groups of eight or fewer or
[6:50:26] simply leaving the zone in two zones.
[6:50:29] 19 youth were detained and transported home or to a drop
[6:50:31] off center operated by irs that focuses on connecting at risk
[6:50:35] youth and their amilies with services.
[6:50:37] in short, the legislation produced the desired outcome
[6:50:40] with narrowly tailored periods of enforcement and increased
[6:50:43] community safety while decreasing at risk behavior by
[6:50:46] youth without increasing juvenile arrests.
[6:50:48] given the trends in 2025, we need to make sure that we are
[6:50:51] all working together to discourage at risk behavior.
[6:50:55] mpd has many efforts to advance this goal.
[6:50:56] working with youth of all ages, officer friendly and badger bear
[6:51:00] helped to build positive relationships with our young
[6:51:02] people. We engaged middle and high
[6:51:05] school aged youth in longer programs like junior cadets or
[6:51:08] youth creating change to help build social and life skills.
[6:51:11] mpd hosts programs and activities to engage in support
[6:51:14] families, including food and clothing drives, holiday events
[6:51:18] and beat the streets. And as the interim chief, I'm
[6:51:20] readily meeting with the youth advisory board and I'm looking
[6:51:23] to learning more from them, mpd's juvenile investigative
[6:51:27] response unit is also working to strengthen partnerships with
[6:51:30] schools, investigate pattern offenses that seem to be stemmed
[6:51:33] by juveniles, and engaging families to deter offending.
[6:51:38] mpd's investigative services bureau has worked to prevent
[6:51:40] several team takeovers when they became aware of social media
[6:51:44] posts organizing a takeover. Members were able to engage with
[6:51:47] the youth and family to have them take down the posts.
[6:51:50] in 2026, mpd will be continuing our efforts to support youth
[6:51:54] while working with our partners to ensure that the appropriate
[6:51:56] accountability for justice involved youth looking inward.
[6:52:00] one of the most critical challenges isn't related to
[6:52:02] crime. It's the continued downward
[6:52:05] slide in sworn staffing for a persistent problem.
[6:52:07] we currently have 3144 sworn members.
[6:52:11] this is about 660 fewer members. And right before the pandemic,
[6:52:15] or the equivalent of losing the staffing of more than two police
[6:52:19] districts. Unfortunately, for fiscal year
[6:52:22] 2025 was the seventh year in a row with separations outpaced
[6:52:25] new hires. This is happening even though
[6:52:28] the separations have reached a lowest level in more than a
[6:52:31] decade, with both resignations and retirements hitting new
[6:52:34] lows. Although the department has made
[6:52:36] progress on retention, the recruitment challenges are
[6:52:39] systematic. First, the good news the cadet
[6:52:42] program has become the strong hiring pipeline that we
[6:52:45] envisioned in the past five years.
[6:52:47] 155 cadets rolled over to become recruits, approximately one
[6:52:50] fifth of all recruits hired over that time.
[6:52:53] mpd also has one of the fastest hiring processes of major police
[6:52:57] departments and applicants, and new hires rate highly for
[6:53:00] professional development opportunities.
[6:53:02] however, it's increasingly difficult to compete against
[6:53:04] other jurisdictions and departments to recruit new
[6:53:07] members. For example, most agencies are
[6:53:09] competing against have a lower entry level requirements.
[6:53:12] a year ago, arlington, montgomery county and mpd were
[6:53:14] the only jurisdictions in the region requiring applicants to
[6:53:17] have more than a high school diploma or ged.
[6:53:20] since then, montgomery county has dropped their college
[6:53:23] requirement credit, credit requirement, although arlington
[6:53:26] still requires the credit, it's better work life balance and
[6:53:30] requires jurisdiction is a draw for some applicants.
[6:53:32] and on july 1st, 2026, the arlington starting salary was
[6:53:36] increased from $72,000 to $90,000 in comparison to mpd
[6:53:41] starting salary of approximately $75,000.
[6:53:43] on the other hand, although federal agencies may still
[6:53:46] require college credits, they are also offering hiring bonuses
[6:53:49] ranging from $50,000 to $70,000, more than twice of mpd's $25,000
[6:53:55] bonus. This is not drawing not only new
[6:53:57] recruits, but also mpd officers who resign.
[6:54:00] I know they're always competing priorities in the district's
[6:54:03] budget, so we're working on low or no cost legislative proposals
[6:54:06] with council support that would expand our hiring pipeline.
[6:54:10] looking ahead to summer of 2026 is going to be one of the
[6:54:13] busiest in dc for decades. As the country celebrates its
[6:54:17] 250th birthday. The district is expected to host
[6:54:19] numerous events, including a two week great american state fair,
[6:54:22] a landmark 4th of july celebration, the grand prix race
[6:54:26] and more events to come. Although the three issues trends
[6:54:29] with youth sworn staffing and the upcoming summer celebrations
[6:54:32] may seem unrelated, they're all connected.
[6:54:34] while we're excited to play a role in this historic
[6:54:37] celebration, there will be unprecedented demands on the
[6:54:39] department and our members. The historically low staffing
[6:54:42] has driven record overtime hours as fewer officers have to work,
[6:54:45] have to work more hours to meet the demands.
[6:54:48] higher overtime puts a strain on officer well-being and their
[6:54:51] families. I've made it a priority to
[6:54:53] identify ways to reduce local overtime while maintaining our
[6:54:55] positive progress on crime reduction.
[6:54:58] we've seen some initial successes, with a 22% reduction
[6:55:02] in overtime hours for the most recent pay period when compared
[6:55:05] to the same period last year. This is only a start, but I hope
[6:55:08] to be able to alleviate some of the strain before the summer
[6:55:11] events begin. This will be impacted by what we
[6:55:14] see in our neighborhoods during the spring and summer.
[6:55:17] the curfew legislation also is set to expire on april 15th,
[6:55:20] right before spring break. I hope the council will consider
[6:55:24] retaining this proactive tool to help both protect our
[6:55:27] communities and young residents. In closing, as I look at the
[6:55:30] past year, I'm excited about what we can accomplish this
[6:55:33] year. Mpd will continue to focus on
[6:55:35] community based policing, accountability, and proactive
[6:55:39] problem solving. We'll work to strengthen trust,
[6:55:41] improve transparency, and ensure that every person feels safe,
[6:55:45] heard, and respected. With that, I'll open up to any
[6:55:48] questions. Ma'am, thank you so much.
[6:55:51] thank you chief, and I'm going to ask everybody as a reminder
[6:55:55] to please. Allow us to have a conversation
[6:56:00] with the chief. We're all going to treat each
[6:56:02] other with respect in here. And if if we can't, I'm going to
[6:56:07] have to ask you to leave. So let's let's keep the peace,
[6:56:10] and I'll be in here. I know many of you have been
[6:56:12] waiting all day to hear the testimony, so let's let's do
[6:56:17] that. Thank you very much for your
[6:56:21] testimony. And congratulations on the
[6:56:25] reduction in crime that mpd has led over the last several years.
[6:56:30] I want to ask you to kind of take us back to last spring in
[6:56:37] the establishment of the safe and beautiful task force.
[6:56:40] what was the communication like to mpd and who serves on that
[6:56:45] task force today? Sure.
[6:56:47] so in the springtime, I believe the president signed an
[6:56:49] executive order. I believe it was in march of
[6:56:51] last year. And during that time frame, mpd
[6:56:54] wasn't really involved with the task force operations there.
[6:56:56] I believe there was a 1 or 2 executive orders, one related to
[6:56:59] the national guard and one related to the overall task
[6:57:02] force that was signed at that point in time, mpd wasn't
[6:57:05] involved with the task force. It wasn't until I believe it was
[6:57:08] august of last year when we actually became involved in task
[6:57:12] force operations after the federal government started
[6:57:15] deploying resources on their own.
[6:57:16] without mpd support. And excuse me for one moment,
[6:57:20] let me just remind my colleagues who have joined us, we're going
[6:57:23] to have 15 minute rounds, and our order is going to be pinto
[6:57:29] henderson, robert white, lewis, george and parker.
[6:57:34] okay. Oh, thank you, thank you so
[6:57:37] much. Great.
[6:57:38] and counselor crawford. Okay.
[6:57:46] okay. And so you said that you weren't
[6:57:48] really involved in those conversations.
[6:57:50] when did you become involved? So it was I believe it was
[6:57:52] august of last year when mpd actually got involved.
[6:57:54] that's after the president started to deploy resources from
[6:57:57] the federal government across the city without mpd assistance
[6:58:01] or involvement. And so that was the first time
[6:58:03] mpd started attending task force meetings.
[6:58:05] yes, the task force had started, and they had actually the u.s.
[6:58:08] marshals had been put in charge of the task force operations by
[6:58:12] the federal government. So it was in august when we were
[6:58:16] brought into it. Okay.
[6:58:17] and are you the representative for mpd at these task force
[6:58:21] meetings? Yes, I have been the
[6:58:22] representative, along with some other members, both of the
[6:58:24] executive staff and the command staff.
[6:58:25] okay. And what is the stated mission
[6:58:29] of this task force? It's a task force that was
[6:58:32] established by by the president to I think their stated mission
[6:58:35] is to keep dc safe and beautiful.
[6:58:37] okay. So so it aligns with the title.
[6:58:41] yes, ma'am. And august was when the
[6:58:44] president declared the public emergency.
[6:58:47] how how have things changed in the operations of the task force
[6:58:51] since after september 9th, when the emergency ended?
[6:58:54] sure. So once the the emergency began,
[6:58:58] obviously mpd was was fully integrated.
[6:59:00] since that time, as time has gone on, task force operations
[6:59:03] have have migrated a bit or changed a bit.
[6:59:06] initially there was a big push of federal officers that you'd
[6:59:10] see across the community, each huge contingents.
[6:59:12] as time has gone on, there's been work to take the federal
[6:59:16] agencies and push them more into investigative areas or areas
[6:59:18] where they may have more experience and operational in
[6:59:21] there. There still is a contingent of
[6:59:23] what they call proactive teams that are integrated or that work
[6:59:26] with the crime suppression teams across the police districts.
[6:59:29] but the numbers of those, those personnel have shrunk down,
[6:59:32] while the investigative folks have increased.
[6:59:34] so, for example, like the us marshals, they they lead the
[6:59:39] capital area regional fugitive task force.
[6:59:40] that's something they did before this.
[6:59:42] but now they have additional resources that are doing more
[6:59:45] warrant enforcement, working with the criminal apprehension
[6:59:48] unit over at the violent crime suppression division and other
[6:59:50] federal agencies to enhance that, because that's their area
[6:59:53] of expertise. Or the dea is working more
[6:59:56] closely and providing more resources with other federal
[6:59:58] agencies with their violent crime suppression division to
[7:00:01] address narcotics operations. So really, that area where those
[7:00:04] agencies have that that special skill set is the areas they're
[7:00:08] going to to try to beef that up. And then of course, there is the
[7:00:12] proactive part that still is a portion of that, but it's much
[7:00:14] smaller now than what it was when it began.
[7:00:17] have you tracked those numbers since it started in august, of
[7:00:23] which how many agents are here from which agency?
[7:00:26] so we don't track the numbers the federal government has does
[7:00:29] track the numbers. The numbers have stayed fairly
[7:00:33] consistent. They've kind of gone down over
[7:00:34] time, I'd say, but it's not something mpd tracks how many
[7:00:38] that they have. How do you know if it's gone
[7:00:40] down, if we haven't tracked the federal government tracks it so
[7:00:44] the feds, the marshals track the us marshals, okay.
[7:00:46] and do they provide that information to mpd?
[7:00:48] they push it out to the agencies involved in the task force.
[7:00:51] yes, ma'am. Okay.
[7:00:52] and do you know how often they're tracking that?
[7:00:54] is that on a weekly basis, a daily basis?
[7:00:56] they put out a daily report, but they also put out a weekly
[7:00:59] report. They have a variety of reports
[7:01:00] that they put out. Okay.
[7:01:02] and it includes which agents are here from which agency does it
[7:01:06] also include arrest data. So there's a daily report that
[7:01:09] has arrest data and numbers of personnel.
[7:01:12] okay. And is mpd a part of collecting
[7:01:17] that data when you are on the scene of an arrest, when there
[7:01:20] is also another federal agent there.
[7:01:21] so we aren't collecting the data, but arrest data is pushed
[7:01:24] to the jock where the the marshals imt that's their
[7:01:28] incident management team is at. So that information from all the
[7:01:31] agencies goes to one central place.
[7:01:33] but in the event that mpd is on the scene where an arrest is
[7:01:37] being made, are you all recording that arrest data?
[7:01:40] only if we make the arrest. Only if mpd itself makes the
[7:01:43] arrest. Yes.
[7:01:44] okay. And regardless of which agency
[7:01:47] makes the arrest, whether it's mpd or a federal agency, that
[7:01:51] information then rolls up to the jock.
[7:01:53] yes, it goes to the incident management team and the jock.
[7:01:55] it's also irregardless of if the arrest happens in the district
[7:01:57] or not. And what I mean by that is, for
[7:01:59] example, park police, if they were to make an arrest in
[7:02:02] maryland, that number would also go to the imt for inclusion in
[7:02:05] their overall numbers. Okay.
[7:02:07] so as you know, the council passed a law in 2021 that limits
[7:02:11] the district's ability to share immigration information about
[7:02:14] individuals who are in mpd custody or actively support
[7:02:18] certain immigration enforcement efforts absent a judicial
[7:02:21] warrant or order. Is it mpd's policy that you
[7:02:25] follow that law? Yes, it is absolutely.
[7:02:28] policy always is. We follow the sanctuary values
[7:02:30] act. It's their mpd officers are not
[7:02:32] allowed to share information once they're inside custody.
[7:02:35] we're not allowed to turn them over to federal agencies.
[7:02:37] we're not allowed to inquire into their immigration status.
[7:02:40] that's in the law. Are you aware of any cases over
[7:02:44] the last six months that that law has been violated by mpd
[7:02:49] officers? I am not aware of any.
[7:02:50] you're under oath. You're under oath.
[7:02:55] everybody, please, please don't make me remind you again.
[7:02:56] we're going to have this conversation.
[7:02:58] we cannot have call outs from the audience.
[7:03:05] we asked in our pre-hearing questions whether executive
[7:03:08] order 25 005 regarding immigration enforcement was
[7:03:12] still in effect. And your response was, yes.
[7:03:15] so why is that order still in place?
[7:03:17] if mpd's policy is that we do not coordinate with immigration
[7:03:21] enforcement? Sure.
[7:03:22] so, executive that executive order brings clarity so that
[7:03:24] executive order is not in contrast to the law.
[7:03:26] it specifically talks about what mpd officers can do prior to
[7:03:30] individuals being in custody. So there is no conflict between
[7:03:33] the executive order and the law. It was actually to make sure
[7:03:35] there was clarity for the officers and not to put them in
[7:03:38] a situation where there wasn't. They were unclear what to do.
[7:03:41] can you elaborate a little more on that and what that means
[7:03:43] prior to being in custody? Yeah.
[7:03:45] so prior so if you're not in police custody, then the
[7:03:48] questions can be asked. Once you're in custody, the law
[7:03:50] is very clear and specific about once you're in custody, we can
[7:03:53] share no information with federal immigration authorities.
[7:03:56] and at no time can we inquire about immigration status.
[7:03:59] so prior to being in custody, the law does not prohibit that
[7:04:02] at this time. And how is in custody defined.
[7:04:06] so that would be like you're under arrest.
[7:04:08] you're in police custody okay. So before someone is under
[7:04:12] arrest, there can be questions asked about immigration status.
[7:04:15] and there can be a transference of somebody not by mpd, by other
[7:04:20] agencies. Mpd will never inquire to
[7:04:21] anyone's immigration status. Other agencies can.
[7:04:24] so for example, if we had a traffic stop, the person wasn't
[7:04:27] in custody and we have information we could share that
[7:04:29] with a federal agency. If that person is placed under
[7:04:32] arrest for a crime, at that point, we can no longer share
[7:04:34] anything based on the law. Okay, okay.
[7:04:39] and so can you provide an example of how this works in
[7:04:43] practice, where information would be shared about someone's
[7:04:47] immigration status prior to an arrest being made?
[7:04:48] yes. So the really we wouldn't be
[7:04:50] sharing information about their immigration status because we
[7:04:52] don't have that. Right.
[7:04:53] so we would be sharing information.
[7:04:54] so what could happen is there could be a person on the scene
[7:04:57] from another federal agency. I'll give you an example of
[7:04:59] marshal service marshals historically don't have title
[7:05:02] eight authority, which is immigration enforcement
[7:05:04] authority. However, now they do so they
[7:05:06] could be on the scene with us. We could do a traffic stop for a
[7:05:09] broken taillight. We could have a driver's
[7:05:10] license. We could be running the
[7:05:12] information. The marshal could take that
[7:05:13] information. They could run it through
[7:05:15] whatever databases that they have related to that, and then
[7:05:17] they can come back with an immigration response and they
[7:05:20] could take action. Okay, okay.
[7:05:28] sorry, sorry. That's okay.
[7:05:31] okay. And when you say that the us
[7:05:33] marshal use I don't want to put words in your mouth, but you
[7:05:35] said something like they used to not do this, but now they can.
[7:05:38] is that formal authority that they've been deputized by this
[7:05:42] task force, that they can handle immigration enforcement?
[7:05:44] where does that authority come from?
[7:05:46] no. So there's certain agencies that
[7:05:47] have what's titled authority, which is immigration enforcement
[7:05:50] authority. So the federal government has
[7:05:51] given them that authority. So there's other agencies.
[7:05:53] some agencies may have had a historically but never used it.
[7:05:57] other agencies now have it that didn't have it before.
[7:06:00] and when did that new authority come to life?
[7:06:03] I'm not exactly sure when they got it.
[7:06:04] I know it was during president trump's term.
[7:06:06] is my understanding of that. But this term you think, yes, my
[7:06:10] understanding is this term. But again, I don't have the
[7:06:12] nuances of when how the federal authorities work with that.
[7:06:14] we weren't involved in any of that.
[7:06:17] okay, mpd is required to transmit a report on january 1st
[7:06:21] of every year to the mayor and the council, providing data on
[7:06:24] requests for information or detainers made by federal
[7:06:28] immigration agencies, individuals released into the
[7:06:30] custody of a federal immigration agency, the types of information
[7:06:33] that the agency shared with federal immigration agencies.
[7:06:36] to date, we have not received any of these reports from mpd.
[7:06:40] when can you commit to getting us this report from 2025?
[7:06:43] yeah, so to date we haven't done any of that.
[7:06:45] and that's why I report the report has never been because it
[7:06:47] never has been. But if that's something that we
[7:06:49] need to provide as a report, we can we can provide that.
[7:06:52] and and maybe what we need to do is think of a longer life cycle,
[7:06:57] that it's also includes the pre-arrest information.
[7:07:03] I mean, we need to comply with the requirements of, of the
[7:07:06] council and the law. So, I mean, we can look into
[7:07:08] that. The issue is a pre-arrest like
[7:07:09] we don't track that information. I think this was one of the
[7:07:12] questions that came up. We don't track pre-arrest
[7:07:14] information from federal agencies of what they do and
[7:07:16] don't do. So we don't have that to
[7:07:19] provide. But if mpd is on site, how how
[7:07:25] complicated would that be for you to track yourself, for us to
[7:07:28] track if they're asking questions or not?
[7:07:30] the question would be is how will we track that information?
[7:07:33] what information will we have to provide?
[7:07:35] again, you know, this is a collaboration, but the federal
[7:07:37] government doesn't have to provide us with information.
[7:07:39] so again, we're putting their officers that are on the scene
[7:07:41] in a very precarious situation, almost like we're trying to have
[7:07:44] them police, the federal law enforcement agencies.
[7:07:50] by by recording who is being arrested and who is being asked
[7:07:54] what questions. I mean, literally, I mean, they
[7:07:55] would have to ask the information.
[7:07:56] I mean, our officers have body worn cameras, so the
[7:07:59] interactions are recorded. But again, that's not put into a
[7:08:01] report somewhere. There is no report of that.
[7:08:07] right. And I guess what I'm trying to
[7:08:08] get at is why not. So they would make a report of
[7:08:13] if there was other federal agencies that were on the scene.
[7:08:16] I mean, again, I don't really see what the purpose of that
[7:08:18] would be, the time it would take to do that, to provide that.
[7:08:22] well, I think the purpose would be around transparency of which
[7:08:25] agencies are here, where they're being deployed, how decisions
[7:08:29] are being made. And then if there is an issue
[7:08:32] with an arrest or a violation of the law or the spirit of the
[7:08:36] law, then we could know how to track it down and follow up.
[7:08:41] but right now, kind of flying blind with what exactly is going
[7:08:47] on in our communities. When the federal agents are
[7:08:50] present, because we're not tracking it.
[7:08:53] I see, I see your point with that.
[7:08:54] but again, it's very difficult to put our officers in that
[7:08:57] situation where, you know, again, an officer is running a
[7:08:59] driver's license over here. There's a federal agent doing
[7:09:01] something else over there. I don't really know what they
[7:09:04] would, what they would track or what they would put down that
[7:09:07] someone's running somebody. I kind of get the idea of where
[7:09:09] you're going with that, but I just don't know how that would
[7:09:11] move forward and how practical that would be.
[7:09:13] every single interaction, just in case later on there was
[7:09:16] something they use information from that stop and they try to
[7:09:18] go back to it. Like, I think we'd have to think
[7:09:20] more about what that looked like.
[7:09:22] okay, I guess you all track your own information, right?
[7:09:25] you track what arrests you're making and how what else is in
[7:09:30] the case report and who the responding officer was and what
[7:09:34] other district they come from. So we have a records management
[7:09:38] system that tracks that. We have no records management
[7:09:40] system. So our records management system
[7:09:42] tracks our officers, has their information in there.
[7:09:43] we don't have that ability. We'd have to establish something
[7:09:47] outside of what we have now to track what the federal
[7:09:49] government agencies are doing outside of their own.
[7:09:51] you know, like the, for example, the the secret service, the park
[7:09:55] police, they have their own records management systems that
[7:09:57] track their own reports and what they're doing.
[7:09:59] we don't track what they're doing in general, and we never
[7:10:03] have. But is it a different level of
[7:10:07] presence that mpd has this year with those federal agents?
[7:10:12] like in the past year, if secret service was doing something or
[7:10:17] fbi or anyone else, it would have been very unlikely for mpd
[7:10:20] to be there, right? It just depends.
[7:10:22] I mean, we serve on task force with these agencies all the
[7:10:24] time. I mean, what we're doing now is
[7:10:26] different than what we've done in the past, but it's not new.
[7:10:28] it's not new for us to work with other federal agencies.
[7:10:31] it's not new for us to work on task force examples of violent
[7:10:34] crimes. The carjacking task force.
[7:10:35] that's something that we started when carjackings went up.
[7:10:38] we've been on that task force with the fbi for many years.
[7:10:40] it's there. So some aspects are different
[7:10:43] new, but working with other agencies isn't really new.
[7:10:46] and it's something that we never track.
[7:10:48] and again, we'd have to establish our own records
[7:10:50] management to track what the federal government is doing
[7:10:52] outside of that. Well, I guess the carjacking
[7:10:55] task force is a good example of how are you tracking
[7:10:59] information? How have you been predating this
[7:11:01] year tracking carjacking information as a result of that
[7:11:04] task force? Sure.
[7:11:05] so in the carjacking task force, all those cases are assigned to
[7:11:08] mpd detectives. They're not assigned to fbi
[7:11:10] agents. They provide support, maybe
[7:11:12] assistance with warrants or technology and things like that,
[7:11:15] but they're not actually assigned the cases to
[7:11:17] investigate. Mpd members are assigned those
[7:11:19] cases. So therefore it goes in our
[7:11:20] records management system. Okay.
[7:11:24] in terms of the daily deployment decisions, walk us through how
[7:11:29] the crime suppression teams are working, where those are
[7:11:32] located, and then who is making a determination as to which
[7:11:36] federal agencies and agents are going out, with which officers,
[7:11:39] and how those deployment decisions are working.
[7:11:40] sure. So each district has a crime
[7:11:42] suppression team. They've always had crime
[7:11:44] suppression teams across the city.
[7:11:45] they've always focused on violent crimes or issues that
[7:11:49] that live within that district. And usually they're directed by
[7:11:51] the commander and based on crime trends that are there.
[7:11:54] so for the proactive teams, there's proactive teams and
[7:11:57] there's investigative teams. We'll slide the investigative
[7:11:59] teams to the side. For now, the proactive teams,
[7:12:03] the federal agents that are on those teams, there's three teams
[7:12:06] target enforcement, targeted enforcement, proactive.
[7:12:08] and then there's high visibility of those teams.
[7:12:11] so the marshal service imt are the ones who determines what the
[7:12:15] federal makeup is of each one of those.
[7:12:18] and then they come to the districts and pair up.
[7:12:19] so they meet at the districts, and then they'll go out with the
[7:12:23] mpd personnel as a lead. And again, there's a reason for
[7:12:26] that. I mean, we don't want the
[7:12:27] federal agents just going out doing whatever they want across
[7:12:30] the city. I mean, we've seen in other
[7:12:32] jurisdictions, when the federal agencies go out, they go in the
[7:12:35] communities. They don't know the area.
[7:12:37] they're not trained to do this. Some of the ramifications that
[7:12:39] have happened from that. So although it's not a situation
[7:12:41] that we particularly want to be in, I do believe for the
[7:12:44] community, it's the best situation, for the situation
[7:12:46] that we find ourselves in. So we don't have rogue federal
[7:12:50] agents across just doing things that aren't in compliance or
[7:12:52] aren't in competition with what we want to do or the issues that
[7:12:55] we're seeing here in the city. Okay, well, thank you.
[7:12:58] and we'll come back to this in a moment.
[7:13:00] as a reminder for folks, our order is councilmember
[7:13:04] henderson, then robert white, then louis george, then parker,
[7:13:06] and then crawford. Council member henderson, please
[7:13:11] go ahead for 15 minute round. Thank you, chair pinto.
[7:13:18] and good afternoon. Almost evening.
[7:13:20] afternoon, chief. I wasn't planning to start here,
[7:13:22] but I do want to follow up on some of the questions that you
[7:13:26] had with councilmember pinto in. Now, I'm paraphrasing, you tell
[7:13:30] me if I'm incorrect, but it sounds like you're saying that
[7:13:34] mpd does not track info when you're doing joint operations
[7:13:38] with federal, with feds. It doesn't.
[7:13:41] I'm not saying we don't track any information.
[7:13:42] if we make an arrest with feds, there will be a report that was
[7:13:45] taken. Right?
[7:13:45] so if mpd and federal agencies are there and mpd makes an
[7:13:49] arrest, then there would be report.
[7:13:50] if an mpd officer makes a stop, then there would be a report
[7:13:52] with that. Okay.
[7:13:53] what we don't have is some sort of separate mechanism that
[7:13:56] stands alone, where we can easily pull that information out
[7:13:58] and say, hey, we had 15 stops, that there were federal agents
[7:14:02] on the scene of if there's an arrest made, there's fellow
[7:14:05] agents there, or they play an assisting role.
[7:14:07] it would be documented in those police reports for prosecution
[7:14:09] and things like that. Okay.
[7:14:10] so how is the decision sort of made then, which agency is
[7:14:14] taking the lead? Who who is the one who is making
[7:14:16] the stop? Who is the one who is then
[7:14:18] initiating the arrest? Yeah.
[7:14:19] so so it just depends, right? Depends on how the teams go out.
[7:14:21] because I think a lot of times people are thinking the teams.
[7:14:24] it's kind of like everyone's together.
[7:14:26] sometimes they are together, sometimes they'll be in the same
[7:14:28] area together again. It's not mpd.
[7:14:31] if we see something that we need to initiate, we can.
[7:14:33] but they're all law enforcement officers, so they all have
[7:14:36] training as far as stopping individuals requirements of
[7:14:38] probable cause, reasonable suspicion.
[7:14:40] so if a marshal is out there and sees an individual they believe
[7:14:45] is is armed or whatever, right? And they have that reasonable
[7:14:48] suspicion, they can make that stop now, more likely than not,
[7:14:50] if there's other mpd officers or whoever else is there, they're
[7:14:53] going to then respond and to assist them with that.
[7:14:55] right, okay. But then again, it depends on
[7:14:58] the situation and the outcome of that.
[7:14:59] in that situation, although the marshal made the stop, it could
[7:15:02] eventually end up that mpd member makes the arrest.
[7:15:04] so in that case, the mpd member would still do the arrest
[7:15:07] paperwork. And in the narrative they would
[7:15:09] indicate, you know, us marshal smith made a stop based on xyz
[7:15:13] officer. You know, carroll responded to
[7:15:15] the scene and laid out that from the information based that came
[7:15:18] from the us marshal. So again, a lot of these are
[7:15:20] collaborative. It depends.
[7:15:21] I know it doesn't sound like a clear answer, I get that, but it
[7:15:24] depends on the situation because it may be an mpd member takes
[7:15:27] the arrest or it could be a pa police officer takes the arrest
[7:15:31] because generally mpd, park police and secret service, those
[7:15:34] are folks that typically deal with the d.c. Superior court
[7:15:36] system. They have the records management
[7:15:38] systems to process those arrests, so usually they will be
[7:15:41] the ones that will be making those arrests in a lot of the
[7:15:44] cases, sure, but you can kind of see what the rub is here, right?
[7:15:48] because we've had a couple of incidents that have occurred
[7:15:52] where the council members of the public are learning about
[7:15:56] something in the media of an incident that occurred.
[7:15:58] federal agents are involved. And then you read down a couple
[7:16:01] of paragraphs and you realize that mpd was there, but nobody
[7:16:04] knew anything about it, when in fact, you guys have the body
[7:16:08] worn cameras. They don't.
[7:16:09] so from the level of transparency and oversight,
[7:16:14] unfortunately y'all are the ones, but nobody's reporting it.
[7:16:17] if you're not the one who is doing the arrest or initiating
[7:16:21] the stop, that is true because we are not the ones and we do
[7:16:23] have body worn cameras. There are other agencies that
[7:16:26] have them too. Park police has them.
[7:16:27] some of the marshals have them. There are some federal agencies
[7:16:29] that have that. But absolutely.
[7:16:31] but you know, I understand. And again, we don't like to be
[7:16:34] in this situation because we get asked questions sometimes about
[7:16:37] federal agencies or people that they believe are federal
[7:16:39] agencies have stopped individuals most times from the
[7:16:42] council or others. Those questions come to us.
[7:16:44] right. So again, we're trying to to dig
[7:16:46] through and look and find out what we can too.
[7:16:47] so it's definitely not the situation we'd like to find
[7:16:50] ourselves in. Okay.
[7:16:53] there was a report from the washington post this afternoon.
[7:16:57] jenny gathright did a story, and you said in your comments back
[7:17:01] with councilmember pinto. And again, I haven't even gotten
[7:17:03] to my own written questions yet that.
[7:17:08] you all don't share immigration information.
[7:17:11] there is an individual who alleges got a call from mpd.
[7:17:14] hey, we found your stolen vehicle that you reported
[7:17:17] stolen. Please come to this police
[7:17:18] station in the district of columbia.
[7:17:21] walked into the police station and he was arrested by
[7:17:24] immigration and customs enforcement.
[7:17:27] how did ice know? But for you all or someone in
[7:17:34] the arena sharing the information that this individual
[7:17:37] was coming in to get their vehicle?
[7:17:39] yeah, obviously, I don't know the specific information related
[7:17:41] to that, and I haven't read the washington post article, but
[7:17:44] again, like for me to kind of sit here and try to think of
[7:17:46] ways there are a variety of ways that could happen.
[7:17:48] obviously it sounds not good, but we need to investigate that
[7:17:51] to see, to find out what happened, because it also could
[7:17:53] have been there could have been a federal agent on the scene
[7:17:56] when the car was recovered, and they could have had the
[7:17:58] information. I mean, there's lots of ways it
[7:17:59] could have happened. So for me to sit here and try to
[7:18:02] throw hypotheticals of how it could have happened without
[7:18:04] having the details, it's, you know, here's the thing about
[7:18:07] jenny's story is that this isn't a one off incident.
[7:18:10] she names another incident that it occurred.
[7:18:12] so now I'm starting to get to questions of pattern and
[7:18:15] practice, which obviously we're not going to get to the bottom
[7:18:18] of in this particular hearing. But there's some gaps in what's
[7:18:21] happening here, because going from a stolen vehicle to being
[7:18:24] arrested by ice, that's when only one agency supposedly had
[7:18:28] the information. That's kind of the problem.
[7:18:30] all right. I want to go to overtime really
[7:18:32] quickly because there's a lot going on in overtime.
[7:18:35] now. I know obviously what happened
[7:18:40] in august was a a problem. I know what's going to happen
[7:18:44] from memorial day to labor day is going to put up that.
[7:18:47] but I'm trying to understand, in terms of npd's own policy on
[7:18:50] overtime. So you have a policy that says
[7:18:53] officers can work no more than 18 hours within a 24 hour
[7:18:56] period, nor in excess of 98 hours per seven calendar days.
[7:19:02] now, this limitations includes all kinds of police work, and
[7:19:06] it's also police related outside employment.
[7:19:09] that is part of that category. As my understanding.
[7:19:13] correct. You're right.
[7:19:14] okay. All right.
[7:19:15] now, are there any instances in which exceptions are granted?
[7:19:20] I mean, unfortunately there could be times there could be
[7:19:22] times like presidential inauguration or times when
[7:19:24] details run over, or there's someone who has a specialized
[7:19:26] skill set that can't be filled by another officer.
[7:19:28] okay. Who do I mean by that?
[7:19:29] who has the authority to make those?
[7:19:30] so they'd have to notify a supervisor if there was going to
[7:19:33] be. So the policy also requires
[7:19:35] notifications to supervisors as they approach the 18 hour rule.
[7:19:37] yeah, that's what we refer to it as.
[7:19:39] and the same thing with the 96 hour rule.
[7:19:41] so they have to make those notifications to see is there
[7:19:44] some way they can be relieved? Is there someone else that can
[7:19:46] can take over that detail? If not, the supervisor will
[7:19:49] should document that of why? Why that reason that that
[7:19:52] officer had had to stay over. Okay.
[7:19:54] who tracks police related outside employment?
[7:19:56] sure. So police raid outside
[7:19:58] employment. So members are required to track
[7:20:00] that and report that as they work it.
[7:20:03] so it's an honor system. I guess you could say it's an
[7:20:07] honor system. I mean, yeah, it's an honor
[7:20:09] system. You have to.
[7:20:10] yeah, it's an honor system. Yeah.
[7:20:11] there's a form you fill out that you have to document your your
[7:20:15] thing. So like, we don't members get
[7:20:17] paid by their own organizations. It's not like, for example, if
[7:20:20] you work security at giant. Giant doesn't tell mpd you
[7:20:23] don't. You're not getting your your
[7:20:25] part time employment or police related employment through the
[7:20:28] department. No, no, no, I understand that
[7:20:29] part. But I'm saying for the purposes
[7:20:31] of the policy, which includes both overtime initiated and
[7:20:34] controlled by mpd and overtime from outside, somebody's got to
[7:20:37] track to make sure somebody's numbers are.
[7:20:39] and this is not there's two things.
[7:20:42] one, look, I know I'm tired after a certain amount of time
[7:20:45] of working, so mistakes happen when folks are tired and that
[7:20:49] type of thing. So this is kind of important.
[7:20:51] okay. Absolutely.
[7:20:52] what percentage of mpd overtime reimbursements are currently
[7:20:56] pending? I'm sorry, I don't have the
[7:20:57] information right now. We can get back to you.
[7:20:58] okay. And I'm referring to I know that
[7:21:01] when there are special events that take place, we're
[7:21:04] reimbursed by the federal. You're talking.
[7:21:05] well, so there's in some cases, yes.
[7:21:07] there's two types. There's a special event where an
[7:21:09] event organizer has it think your your your rock and roll
[7:21:12] marathon. Those are reimbursable overtimes
[7:21:14] that are reimbursed by the organizer.
[7:21:15] then there's other events like maybe july 4th where it's
[7:21:19] charged back to the fund. Okay, so you don't know how much
[7:21:22] money you're owed. I don't see this table right
[7:21:24] here. I don't have that.
[7:21:26] we definitely have the information.
[7:21:27] the agency. I don't have it off the top of
[7:21:29] my head. Okay, mpd, you'll never want to
[7:21:31] phone a friend. Like we come to a performance
[7:21:33] oversight hearing to talk about performance.
[7:21:35] and nobody ever wants to be prepared.
[7:21:36] I don't like to do post-hearing questions, but now we do.
[7:21:39] I understand, but I don't want to sit here and misspeak at the
[7:21:41] hearing. And then later on there's an
[7:21:43] issue or concern about I misspoke.
[7:21:45] sometimes there is the budget officer who is available
[7:21:48] nonetheless. Okay, you guys budgeted $36.9
[7:21:52] million for overtime. In fy 25.
[7:21:56] we know you spent more than that, spent about 61 million.
[7:21:59] yes, ma'am. We already know what you have
[7:22:03] going on this year is going to be insufficient.
[7:22:06] so how much has mpd spent on overtime to date for fy 26?
[7:22:09] I don't have the exact information.
[7:22:11] I do have miss campbell here. She may be able to speak to
[7:22:13] that. Do you only have her come up so
[7:22:16] she can speak to it? I'm sure this is not my hearing.
[7:22:18] can can he phone a friend? Do you mind if I have?
[7:22:20] miss? Director of resource
[7:22:21] accountability. Oh, absolutely.
[7:22:22] come on up. We just need to swear you in
[7:22:24] quickly. Sure, we can pause the clock for
[7:22:27] a second if you. Oh, yeah.
[7:22:31] I didn't know we had bright lights.
[7:22:34] bright lights, big city. All right.
[7:22:37] welcome, akima. Will you stop the clock, please?
[7:22:39] thank you so much. If you can state your name and
[7:22:41] position for the record, you got to turn your mic on.
[7:22:46] patricia campbell, director of resource accountability.
[7:22:49] great. And I'm just going to swear you
[7:22:50] in quickly if you can raise your right hand.
[7:22:52] do you swear or affirm under penalty of law that the
[7:22:55] testimony you're about to provide before this committee
[7:22:58] and the council of the district of columbia is the truth, the
[7:23:00] whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
[7:23:02] yes, ma'am. Thank you.
[7:23:03] go ahead. Okay, so the question was about
[7:23:06] how much mpd has spent on overtime in fy 26.
[7:23:09] to date. 26, if you give me one second.
[7:23:17] and gross overtime. Yeah, gross overtime is at $41
[7:23:22] million, 41.6 for fy 26. Yes, ma'am.
[7:23:26] is february okay? So we're for fiscal year 26.
[7:23:31] yes. 26.8 of that is local.
[7:23:35] and oh okay. So 26.8 of that is local out of
[7:23:40] the 60, 41.6, 41.6 and 14.8 of that is non-local.
[7:23:46] okay. I'm gonna ask a clarifying
[7:23:48] question, chief. So they were pre-hearing
[7:23:50] responses that were provided. There's a chart that is attached
[7:23:53] to question 47, and that is about the top overtime earners,
[7:23:59] which listed, you know, several sergeants, lieutenants,
[7:24:03] captains, etc. At that part. Not the problem.
[7:24:06] the chart shows that the top overtime earner took home
[7:24:12] 103,000 in overtime, and that their base salary was 40, and
[7:24:17] that the second earner took home $100,000 in overtime, and that
[7:24:20] their base salary was 38. And I'm trying to understand
[7:24:23] whether or not those numbers were reversed or is that chart
[7:24:29] accurate? It is accurate, ma'am.
[7:24:33] it's accurate. Okay.
[7:24:35] she said it was accurate. So that seems that's.
[7:24:42] what I'm gonna ask. I'm sorry.
[7:24:44] no. Go ahead.
[7:24:44] you're referring to fy 26, right?
[7:24:47] no. I think the chart that was
[7:24:48] attached was regarding fy 27 or fy 25.
[7:24:52] I think we have both in there. I think we have 25 and 26.
[7:24:55] the portion thereof inside the questions.
[7:24:59] okay. But overall in general that
[7:25:01] seems off that somebody has a base salary of $38,000, but is
[7:25:05] able to earn $100,000 in overtime.
[7:25:06] I don't see any. There's no sworn member that has
[7:25:08] a base salary of $38,000. Okay.
[7:25:12] that's why I asked if the chart is accurate.
[7:25:15] no, I don't have the chart in front of me.
[7:25:16] that's why again, that's okay. So we'll ask some follow up
[7:25:19] questions on that. Yes I got three minutes.
[7:25:21] so let me keep moving really quickly.
[7:25:26] I recently got the department of insurance, securities and
[7:25:28] banking as part of my committee, and I chair the committee on
[7:25:30] health is the financial crimes unit at mpd still active?
[7:25:34] so there is a financial and cyber crimes.
[7:25:36] it's a very small unit compared to what it was.
[7:25:37] I believe there's three people that are currently in there.
[7:25:40] a lot of it is work with other federal agencies.
[7:25:44] three people. Yeah, at this point for both
[7:25:46] financial crimes and cybersecurity, it's all one
[7:25:48] unit. Okay.
[7:25:50] formerly it was called check and fraud years ago.
[7:25:52] but yeah, okay. Is that sufficient?
[7:25:59] a lot of the crimes that occur in that arena are federally
[7:26:02] related crimes. So that's why the task.
[7:26:04] so the challenge with that is, is working with the federal
[7:26:06] agencies that really have the authorities to to further delve
[7:26:09] into that, the fbi and other things.
[7:26:11] so a lot of those investigations are joint investigations where
[7:26:13] we work with them. Obviously, you know, as as we
[7:26:17] talked about, we have a lot of staffing challenges.
[7:26:18] so there's a competing interest. We would like to be able to put
[7:26:21] more people in the unit for sure.
[7:26:23] okay. I think that's one of those
[7:26:26] questions too, of as we have all of these other sort of federal
[7:26:29] responsibilities that occur, what's kind of being left behind
[7:26:33] in terms of not necessarily getting the full attention in
[7:26:37] terms of also, I think very important crimes?
[7:26:40] no. And I think that's an area where
[7:26:41] we're looking to have the federal government and some of
[7:26:43] those agencies that really focus on that continue to support us
[7:26:45] on that, because that is an area where they actually have some
[7:26:48] expertise in as opposed to street patrol.
[7:26:50] in terms of that overlap. I know that you talked about
[7:26:52] like, oh, there are certain agencies for whom have a more
[7:26:56] public facing interaction with the public.
[7:26:58] I would say probably the secret service and park police are
[7:27:00] amongst those. There's some other federal
[7:27:02] agencies for whom they don't do traffic stops on a normal basis.
[7:27:05] and we've seen some of the things in language that they
[7:27:10] even I mean, last summer, last summer was like the wild, wild
[7:27:13] west. But to be stopped at a traffic
[7:27:15] stop and have a federal officer ask, what is your business in
[7:27:18] the district as though the district is somehow closed?
[7:27:21] like that tells me that person does not have training, but talk
[7:27:25] to me a little bit about the scanner situation.
[7:27:29] is it normal for. Is it normal for federal
[7:27:37] agencies to have full access to our scanner?
[7:27:41] what's this? I'm sorry, what's a scanner?
[7:27:43] so, you know, I don't know. Police scanner.
[7:27:45] oh. The radio.
[7:27:46] yeah. For dispatch.
[7:27:47] yeah. So our channels are encrypted.
[7:27:49] they don't have access. Like there's no scanner that can
[7:27:51] hear it. I think more so maybe you're
[7:27:53] asking, are there federal agencies that have our channels?
[7:27:55] there are some. Park police have our channels.
[7:27:57] uniformed division, secret service have our channels like
[7:28:00] our district channels. So there are some there are some
[7:28:03] mutual aid or interagency channels that are federal
[7:28:05] agencies have that are connected.
[7:28:06] so when there's a situation, let's say that there's a call
[7:28:08] that comes into ouc. And I want one call.
[7:28:10] yes. How is it that a federal agent
[7:28:15] would show up before you all? I think you're talking about a
[7:28:18] specific case potentially to happen.
[7:28:20] maybe there could be another agency like park police or
[7:28:23] another agency that has the radio zone that can hear the
[7:28:25] call come out, and they can arrive on the scene just by
[7:28:27] listening to it, but they would have to call in back to dispatch
[7:28:31] to say, we're going or no, no, they can just go.
[7:28:32] they can just hear the run and they could just show up on the
[7:28:35] scene, the runs not being assigned to them.
[7:28:36] we wouldn't assign it to a federal agency.
[7:28:38] they would assign it to mpd officers that would arrive on
[7:28:41] the scene. But other agencies that can hear
[7:28:42] those transmissions could come to the area.
[7:28:49] where I'm over my time, but I know they got this.
[7:28:55] I just because you. There's nothing new they've
[7:29:02] they've had like park police and secret service, capitol police.
[7:29:04] that's nothing new. I understand that I understand
[7:29:06] we're in a different situation, but park police, I feel like
[7:29:09] again, park police and secret service are very different in
[7:29:11] terms of their interaction. They're they're dealing with
[7:29:15] people, secret service. They deal with children.
[7:29:17] right. Come up to the white house
[7:29:18] around the federal enclave, etc. I'm just trying to understand,
[7:29:21] and I think the public is trying to understand if I call 911, are
[7:29:25] you showing up or or is femme showing up or is ice showing up?
[7:29:29] yeah. And that part is real gray right
[7:29:31] now. Well, I can say if you call 911
[7:29:34] mpd showing up, can other agencies hear those calls that
[7:29:37] have those radio channels? Absolutely they can.
[7:29:39] but mpd is being dispatched to call on mpd is responding.
[7:29:42] I think that makes it a little. You see now the uneasiness of
[7:29:45] some people calling for help. No, I definitely understand.
[7:29:48] I'm not saying it's a situation that we want to be in or where
[7:29:50] we want to be, but I want to make sure that we're transparent
[7:29:52] and clear on what can what the state is right now.
[7:29:55] like that's what the state is. Thank you.
[7:29:57] thank you for thank you, counselor henderson.
[7:29:59] guys, I've got to ask you again, please.
[7:30:01] you cannot respond in this way. It's not right.
[7:30:05] we are trying to ask questions. We're going to treat everybody
[7:30:08] with respect in this room, in this committee.
[7:30:13] councilmember parker, thank you. Chief carol.
[7:30:17] mayor bowser has denied collaboration between mpd and
[7:30:22] ice, publicly stating, quote, ice is not patrolling with mpd.
[7:30:25] end quote unquote. Mpd is not giving the federal
[7:30:29] government anybody, end quote. This claim was repeated in your
[7:30:33] letter to the council on january 10th.
[7:30:35] yet there have been many videos. There is a lot of testimony
[7:30:39] today. We then heard at a november anc
[7:30:43] eight, a meeting that from lieutenant karen roberts, who
[7:30:48] said, quote, we are working with ice.
[7:30:51] what accounts for the gap in the executive's statements about
[7:30:56] collaboration with federal immigration authorities?
[7:30:59] yeah. So I can't speak to what
[7:31:02] accounts for the discrepancy. What I can tell you is we're not
[7:31:05] working with ice enforcement removal operations, which is
[7:31:08] your what people refer to as ice that come out and remove and do
[7:31:12] civil immigration enforcement. With that being said, there was
[7:31:15] a time period during the the crime emergency when president
[7:31:19] trump initiated the emergency, when we were you know, chief
[7:31:23] smith spoke about that. Since that time frame, we have
[7:31:26] not been patrolling with the they call themselves ero, but
[7:31:29] the enforcement removal operations.
[7:31:31] there are other agencies in the city that do patrol with them.
[7:31:33] yeah. Ice is the ero is the common
[7:31:36] term for that is ice. We are not patrolling with them.
[7:31:38] there are other agencies that do patrol with them.
[7:31:40] they are in the city. And how how do you define
[7:31:44] collaboration? How do I define collaboration?
[7:31:48] because maybe that explains the discrepancy, that there is some
[7:31:51] way you're defining or the mayor is defining collaboration, that
[7:31:55] the public is not? Yes.
[7:31:56] I mean, I would define collaboration as like for
[7:31:59] example, are we riding with them?
[7:32:00] are we out on the scene with them?
[7:32:02] we are not on any teams with the ice ero teams that are out
[7:32:05] there. We have not been since the end
[7:32:07] of the emergency that's out there.
[7:32:08] we are not providing information to isauro once people are in
[7:32:12] custody. Those are, as we talk about the
[7:32:14] the d.c. Code. We're not allowed to do that.
[7:32:15] we are not allowed to ask individuals about their
[7:32:18] immigration status. We're not allowed to share that
[7:32:20] information. So that's what I call
[7:32:22] collaboration. We're not we're not going out
[7:32:24] with ice. Ero ikaro is going out on their
[7:32:27] own. They are going out with other
[7:32:28] agencies. They are not on teams that we
[7:32:30] are on. So that's what I would define
[7:32:33] collaboration. I don't know if there's a
[7:32:35] different interpretation. Maybe.
[7:32:36] are you privy to the office of police complaints?
[7:32:40] the formal complaints that have been made about collaboration?
[7:32:43] I know there have been some. I had the opportunity to hear
[7:32:45] the the earlier hearing. With that, the specifics of
[7:32:48] them, I do not know. And obviously any complaint that
[7:32:50] comes into opc, just like when they come to mpd and we refer
[7:32:53] them to opc, I know they'll follow up and investigate those
[7:32:56] complaints. A lot of times in these
[7:32:58] situations, folks don't know who's out there.
[7:33:00] I think we've been highlighted inside some of the community
[7:33:02] comments. They see people in tactical
[7:33:03] vest. They don't know what agency
[7:33:05] they're with. So again, they refer those for
[7:33:08] further investigation as they should if they believe it's
[7:33:10] misconduct. Okay.
[7:33:12] more to come on that I would just say it was unsatisfying.
[7:33:15] we heard literally in a matter of ten minutes that there were
[7:33:20] no formal complaints. There were three formal
[7:33:22] complaints. There were less than a dozen,
[7:33:24] but more than three. And then there was a number of
[7:33:27] 87 thrown out. So there's still a level of
[7:33:30] ambiguity about how many formal complaints there actually have
[7:33:33] been. Do you have a sense of how many
[7:33:35] formal complaints have been made about collaboration?
[7:33:38] I do not know what opc has received, any any complaint that
[7:33:41] we receive. Citizen complaints were required
[7:33:43] to refer them to opc for determination.
[7:33:45] they determine if they're going to investigate it or they can
[7:33:48] refer back to us if it doesn't meet their their mandated
[7:33:51] requirements. But we have to give them to them
[7:33:53] and then they would send it back or they handle it so they would
[7:33:55] be the place to to provide you with those.
[7:33:57] the full picture of that on october 17th, mpd was patrolling
[7:34:01] in collaboration with five federal agencies, including
[7:34:05] homeland security, and in the midst of a traffic stop for a
[7:34:07] car missing a front tag, a homeland security member shot a
[7:34:13] d.c. Resident, philip brown's car, leaving bullet holes in the
[7:34:16] driver's side window and passenger seat.
[7:34:19] mr. Brown was then arrested. No gunfire was recorded in the
[7:34:24] initial mpd public incident report.
[7:34:27] during court proceedings, however, mpd officer jason
[7:34:30] sterling informed the court that a superior or unit team lead
[7:34:34] advised him not to document the gunshots fired by a homeland
[7:34:39] security officer. In response to pre-hearing
[7:34:44] questions, 188 mpd did not explain the status of its
[7:34:47] internal affairs investigation of this incident.
[7:34:50] can you provide an update? Sure.
[7:34:52] so internal affairs. So my understanding with that is
[7:34:54] there were two reports that were taken, one which described the
[7:34:56] incident and there was one for discharge of a firearm that was
[7:34:59] taken by internal affairs. So I think that's where the
[7:35:02] confusion came in with that. With that being said, my
[7:35:05] understanding with that case is internal affairs gather the
[7:35:08] information. They present it to the united
[7:35:09] states attorney's office, who then decline the information.
[7:35:12] once that's declined by the us attorney's office for
[7:35:14] prosecution, then it's returned to the home agency for any
[7:35:18] administrative investigations as it relates to that.
[7:35:19] so at this point, since there is no there's been a criminal
[7:35:22] declination by united states attorney's office, it's then
[7:35:24] referred back to the home agency for their administrative agency
[7:35:27] being phc. No.
[7:35:28] the home agency is where the officer is assigned to.
[7:35:30] so in this case, it's an. Officer.
[7:35:34] so see, because their policies and their procedures of how they
[7:35:37] report use of force, their policies about how they they do
[7:35:41] is not the same as mpd. They have their own policies
[7:35:44] that that are guided by their own internal investigation.
[7:35:46] has there been to the allegation that jason sterling was told by
[7:35:50] a unit lead not to record what happened at the scene?
[7:35:54] I can't speak to that. I don't know, that's something I
[7:35:56] have to follow up with you. I do know there was a report
[7:35:58] that did discharge that did complete that for discharge of a
[7:36:01] firearm. I know we put out a press
[7:36:03] release saying the mpd internal affairs was investigating that.
[7:36:06] so I know publicly we acknowledge that we were
[7:36:08] investigating that. I can't speak right now.
[7:36:10] I have to follow up with you on that.
[7:36:11] okay. So because the us attorney's
[7:36:16] office declined to take up the matter, it was referred back to
[7:36:19] the home agency. And what I'm also hearing you
[7:36:22] say is mpd is doing its own internal investigation.
[7:36:25] no. So when it comes to outside law
[7:36:28] enforcement agencies, mpd's role in the investigation is just
[7:36:31] that. No, I get that.
[7:36:32] but we have and I have the reference here.
[7:36:35] so according to mpd police academy guidance on basic report
[7:36:40] writing, incident reports must include factual details of the
[7:36:43] incident, including who, what, when, where, how and why.
[7:36:46] mpd executive order 19 009 states that arrest information
[7:36:51] is automatically uploaded to the force incident report,
[7:36:54] indicating the documentation of a use of force is suffused with
[7:36:59] arrest information and as well as d.c. Law.
[7:37:01] so we know that according to the allegations by this officer, not
[7:37:07] only was dc law broken, but mpd protocol was broken.
[7:37:11] so you're talking two different things.
[7:37:12] so the force investigative reporting system is if an mpd
[7:37:15] member uses force, then there's a report that they have to
[7:37:18] complete. Know what I'm talking about is
[7:37:21] the requirement to record what happened at the scene.
[7:37:24] so that so yeah. So I'm trying to make sure that
[7:37:27] we're we're on the same path here.
[7:37:28] I guess maybe if we push it, push apart the side about the
[7:37:32] actual shooting, if there's an allegation of misconduct on the
[7:37:35] officer. Now I want to be clear.
[7:37:37] so like that's let's be clear about this.
[7:37:38] so if we push it aside and we address that, if we're talking
[7:37:41] about did the officer engage in misconduct by not including in
[7:37:44] the report. That would be a separate
[7:37:45] investigation by mpd internal. So that's what I'm asking you
[7:37:49] about. And you're saying and I'm saying
[7:37:50] I'm not insight. I'm saying I can't tell you
[7:37:52] right now. Again, I don't want to sit here
[7:37:54] and misspeak and tell you there is or isn't.
[7:37:55] I want to give you the correct answer to that.
[7:37:57] is there anybody here today that can give us an update on that?
[7:38:00] no, I don't think there is. At this point.
[7:38:01] we would need to make sure again, I want to make sure that
[7:38:03] we can give you the actual information.
[7:38:05] so I imagine there is no update on whether disciplinary action
[7:38:10] has been taken. I guess.
[7:38:11] I don't know at this point what where the status is with that.
[7:38:14] so I need to get back to you. If the investigation has been
[7:38:17] completed or not. Obviously that would drive
[7:38:19] forward, but you would agree that would be a breach of mpd
[7:38:22] protocol. I would agree that it would need
[7:38:23] to be investigated to determine was there a breach of policy or
[7:38:26] not. If a unit officer told another
[7:38:29] officer not to record something that happened, that is a breach
[7:38:32] of mpd protocol, is that not right?
[7:38:35] it sounds like it, yes, it does, but what I'm going to say is
[7:38:37] every member has the right to an investigation of potential
[7:38:39] misconduct. So I don't want to sit here and
[7:38:41] prejudge without investigation being done because they do have
[7:38:45] procedural rights. And I want to make sure that
[7:38:46] it's accurate information. Okay.
[7:38:48] but yes, on their commitment to provide a timeline to the
[7:38:51] council, how long we should wait for this investigation and
[7:38:56] follow up. Sure.
[7:38:57] so I think within a week we can give you a response of where
[7:39:00] we're at with it. Okay.
[7:39:00] if not, I appreciate that. I appreciate it is full body
[7:39:04] police body camera footage of this incident available?
[7:39:08] I believe they're I'm not sure. Again, I don't want to misspeak
[7:39:11] on this. My understanding on this
[7:39:12] incident because there was two different situations.
[7:39:14] and that's why I want to make sure that we're on the right
[7:39:16] one. The officers weren't there when
[7:39:18] it actually happened. They got these shortly
[7:39:20] thereafter. However, d.c. Code does not
[7:39:22] allow for us to release mpd members bwcs if they're not
[7:39:25] involved in the serious use of force.
[7:39:28] okay, I am privy to the fact that some council members have
[7:39:32] seen the footage. I am also told that community
[7:39:36] members want to see the footage, but they haven't been able to
[7:39:38] access it. Is there a reason why the
[7:39:40] community may not be able to access the footage?
[7:39:42] because the law does not provide for that.
[7:39:45] the law provides that mpd member has to be involved in the
[7:39:47] serious use of force for it to be released.
[7:39:49] the process. There has to be a great public
[7:39:51] interest. The only other way underneath
[7:39:53] the law. Again, this this is the law, not
[7:39:55] mpd policy is there has to be a great public interest.
[7:39:58] then I think council member pinto introduced emergency
[7:40:02] legislation yesterday that would make that would change that
[7:40:05] policy. Does mpd support that change?
[7:40:08] I haven't I've heard tangentially of what that looks
[7:40:11] like. I haven't had the time to delve
[7:40:12] into it completely. I don't know what the impacts
[7:40:14] would be for that specifically. I do know that that was that was
[7:40:17] introduced by the council member.
[7:40:18] maybe somebody else also introduced something similar.
[7:40:21] the chairman? The chair?
[7:40:21] yes. Again, I don't have the
[7:40:24] specifics of that. Okay.
[7:40:26] I'm going to move on for the sake of time.
[7:40:28] but I needless to say, it's unsatisfying.
[7:40:32] and I think for your credibility and the credibility of the
[7:40:36] agency, we need to get to the bottom of what happened and to
[7:40:39] repair trust, because trust is broken not only within the
[7:40:43] community and the family that is heartbroken about what happened,
[7:40:45] but the council, which is why we're moving.
[7:40:47] I understand, I understand, but right now mpd is complying with
[7:40:50] the law. We're bound by the law.
[7:40:52] okay. At the february 11th performance
[7:40:55] oversight hearing for the deputy mayor of public safety and
[7:40:57] justice, deputy mayor pia suggested that incidents of
[7:41:01] illicit collaboration between mpd and federal agents, such as
[7:41:04] what occurred at d.c. Bilingual on september 25th, 2025, are
[7:41:10] isolated and not systemic. Deputy mayor appiah noted that
[7:41:13] there is, quote, not the level of immigration enforcement in
[7:41:17] the district that people think is happening.
[7:41:18] end quote. She seemed to suggest that the
[7:41:21] evidence of collaboration was slim and didn't hold up to mpd
[7:41:25] scrutiny. Do you agree with this
[7:41:27] impression? And what what what evidence do
[7:41:31] you have to support such a claim?
[7:41:34] yeah, and if I can say one additional thing, where we are
[7:41:39] sitting, we see videos, we hear anecdotes, we hear day long
[7:41:44] testimony where people are saying, this is what we're
[7:41:46] seeing, seeing and hearing. And we hear the deputy mayor, we
[7:41:50] hear mpd say, oh, that's not happening.
[7:41:52] so my question is, prove it. How do you assure us that it's
[7:41:57] not happening? What are you looking at to prove
[7:41:58] that? It's not sure.
[7:42:00] so obviously, it'd be great if we could come in here and have
[7:42:02] some empirical data. Some numbers say, hey, x, y, z.
[7:42:04] and I know that's what people like to have.
[7:42:06] with that being said, if this was happening on such a large
[7:42:09] scale as it is, there are 2 or 3 isolated incidents that have
[7:42:13] received a lot of attention that's out there, and one of
[7:42:15] which you spoke about that's out there, but you're not seeing
[7:42:18] this on social media. It's not out here publicly.
[7:42:21] there are there are individuals, obviously, that continue to push
[7:42:25] that out there, but we're not seeing that.
[7:42:26] so again, that's anecdotal and that's what the deputy mayor
[7:42:28] said. We are not seeing it.
[7:42:30] so then again today with the office of police complaints, I'm
[7:42:35] asking. All right.
[7:42:35] here are the formal complaints. They couldn't give me a concrete
[7:42:38] number. You can't give me a concrete
[7:42:40] number. So, you know, it feels like
[7:42:42] gaslighting. You're like, yeah, file a
[7:42:44] complaint if you see it happening.
[7:42:45] but yet you don't have the data even there to back up how many
[7:42:49] complaints we've received. Well, opc is not mpd, so I can't
[7:42:53] provide their data and I don't have that information.
[7:42:55] what I do have is the information that we do have.
[7:42:58] and like I said again, it's anecdotal, but if this was
[7:43:01] happening at some large scale prevalence, it would be all
[7:43:03] over. Social media, we know, is all
[7:43:04] over social media. We know there are a few.
[7:43:06] there are a few incidents that are out there, right, that
[7:43:09] continue to circle around there. So again, I can't provide opc's
[7:43:12] data with that. I wish I could provide something
[7:43:14] more more formal. If there is information out
[7:43:17] there, we would ask that people provide that.
[7:43:19] so that way we can investigate if members are violating the
[7:43:21] policy or violating the law, then they'll be held and
[7:43:24] addressed accountable. Okay, that's that's how that is.
[7:43:26] good to hear that. We will hold that is good to
[7:43:28] hear. So then my follow up question is
[7:43:30] how many officers have been held accountable to date for
[7:43:33] collaboration or stepping outside of mpd policy as it
[7:43:36] relates to federal authorities? Sure.
[7:43:38] and so at this point, like we talked about before, I don't
[7:43:39] have that information, just like you said with opc.
[7:43:43] again, again, we can go back and look at the cases and make sure
[7:43:46] that we're clear. I don't want to sit here and I
[7:43:47] understand there's a lot of pressure.
[7:43:49] today is an oversight hearing. You had to know we were going to
[7:43:51] ask you about this. You had to know that I would
[7:43:54] think you would come in here to say I'm my fight is to rebuild
[7:43:57] trust. And let me assure you that the
[7:43:59] buck stops here. I'm glad to hear you say we're
[7:44:02] going to hold officers accountable, but then it just
[7:44:05] strikes me as odd that you would then say, oh, but we don't have
[7:44:08] any numbers to back up. Okay, I have one more minute.
[7:44:11] and then I know lewis george, councilmember lewis george is
[7:44:15] ready to jump in. In your response to pre-hearing
[7:44:20] question 115, mpd notes that mpd executive order 25 005 is still
[7:44:26] in effect while the executive order clarifies the mpd officers
[7:44:30] may not share information about individuals, mpd custody with
[7:44:35] federal immigration officers or agencies, rather, mpd notes in
[7:44:38] its answer to question 115 that officers are free to share
[7:44:43] information about individuals involved in traffic stops and
[7:44:46] can give federal immigration agents or detained subjects
[7:44:50] rights. Yet mpd insists that this does
[7:44:53] not amount to civil immigration enforcement, so that comes back
[7:44:58] to what I was asking earlier how you define collaboration.
[7:45:02] how is mpd coming to the conclusion that this is not
[7:45:07] effectively engaging in civil immigration enforcement?
[7:45:09] if you are sharing names and information of people that you
[7:45:13] are engaging with in your line of duty, we're following the
[7:45:16] law. The law is very specific, as we
[7:45:18] talked about earlier, about when information can and cannot be
[7:45:21] provided. Once an individual is in
[7:45:22] custody, based on the law passed by the council, that information
[7:45:25] cannot be shared. We didn't want to put our
[7:45:27] officers in a situation where there was once the person is in
[7:45:30] custody, that's what the law says.
[7:45:31] absolutely. And we cite the law inside of
[7:45:33] the executive order. Okay, walk with me.
[7:45:36] if mpd officer pulls someone over, you're not in custody.
[7:45:41] yet. You can't share their
[7:45:44] information. We can share their information.
[7:45:45] with that being said, we're not on patrol with ice, ero or civil
[7:45:49] immigration authority folks that are out there, but there are
[7:45:53] other agencies that have that authority that have not had in
[7:45:55] the past the us marshals, the park police.
[7:45:57] so if there's a park police officer that's there and they
[7:46:00] decide to then flip that and do something and check that through
[7:46:03] some database or whatever they may have have access to, they
[7:46:06] have that ability to do that. So under oath, your testimony
[7:46:09] today is mpd is not sharing the name or information of any
[7:46:14] individuals prior to being taken into custody with any federal
[7:46:18] agency. No, that's not what I'm saying,
[7:46:20] okay? I'm not saying they were not
[7:46:21] providing their information. No, the law is specific.
[7:46:24] it says that once an individual is in custody.
[7:46:25] so now I'm asking about the practice.
[7:46:27] so we're clear. That was helpful.
[7:46:29] so yes, prior to being taken into custody you can share
[7:46:31] information. That's correct.
[7:46:32] once they're in custody, you're saying mpd cannot share.
[7:46:35] you cannot. So what we routinely hear about
[7:46:37] are these pretextual traffic stops where all of a sudden now
[7:46:41] people are seemingly being handed over to immigration
[7:46:46] enforcement authorities. And what I'm asking you under
[7:46:48] oath is you are assuring us that mpd is not authorizing that
[7:46:54] behavior within the force. No.
[7:46:55] and we're not sending officers out to do immigration
[7:46:58] enforcement. We're not actually sending
[7:46:59] officers out to take people to areas to do civil immigration
[7:47:03] enforcement. That is not what we want to do.
[7:47:04] that is not an area that we want to be in.
[7:47:06] this is a situation that the city itself is in.
[7:47:09] we don't want to be in these situations.
[7:47:11] we are not going to violate the law.
[7:47:15] okay, I am over time, I'm going to respect the clock and my
[7:47:19] colleagues. Next on this list is
[7:47:23] councilmember lewis george, council member white, I believe
[7:47:27] is after that. So councilmember lewis george,
[7:47:29] I'm going to turn to you. Yeah.
[7:47:30] thank you. Good evening.
[7:47:32] I want to start on february 11th.
[7:47:36] julian bailey, a 43 year old father and son and a neighbor,
[7:47:41] was shot and killed by u.s. Marshals.
[7:47:44] I understand that mpd was originally called out to respond
[7:47:48] to this incident, and that mr. Bailey was allegedly initially
[7:47:52] involved in, and you all were there and now, and that mpd is
[7:47:56] now conducting an investigation into what happened.
[7:47:59] but I do believe our community deserves some answers right now.
[7:48:02] and so I want to understand what happened at the convenience
[7:48:06] store when mpd was still on the scene.
[7:48:10] sure. Excuse me.
[7:48:11] so some preliminary information that I have, and obviously this
[7:48:14] is under investigation. So there's going to be a limit
[7:48:16] to to what I can say about the actual officer involved shooting
[7:48:19] portion of it, because internal affairs is investigating that
[7:48:22] portion. Again, just like we talked about
[7:48:24] earlier. They'll refer the information to
[7:48:26] the u.s. Attorney's office for determination on prosecution
[7:48:29] with that. Outside of that, as it relates
[7:48:31] to the convenience store, a call came out.
[7:48:33] officers responded to the convenience store.
[7:48:35] mpd officers responded to the convenience store to
[7:48:38] investigate. That call, I believe was an
[7:48:39] individual. The call was for an individual I
[7:48:41] believe that was armed with a gun.
[7:48:43] when those officers were on the scene investigating that, that's
[7:48:46] when other agencies, park police and marshals arrived on the
[7:48:49] scene because they overheard those transmissions on the over
[7:48:53] the radio. Okay.
[7:48:55] and so at what point did mpd leave the scene at the
[7:48:58] convenience store? My understanding is so after and
[7:49:04] again, we can only go so far kind of into it so we don't
[7:49:07] impede the investigations there. My understanding is the marshals
[7:49:09] and the park police were there. They then left looking for the
[7:49:13] individual. Shortly thereafter, mpd officers
[7:49:15] left as well. I do know when the officer
[7:49:18] involved shooting did occur. Mpd officers were not on the
[7:49:20] scene of that. They arrived shortly thereafter.
[7:49:22] and I guess I want to know why. Why did u.s. Marshals and park
[7:49:29] police apprehend mr. Bailey without mpd present after the
[7:49:33] fact? Because if you arrived on scene
[7:49:36] and he was at the convenience store, I'm just trying to figure
[7:49:38] out how he ended up. Then alone without metropolitan
[7:49:43] police there with then park police and u.s. Marshals and
[7:49:46] then being murdered. How did how did mpd leave this
[7:49:51] scene and allow him to be left with u.s. Marshals and park
[7:49:54] police? So, no.
[7:49:55] so it didn't happen there. So the mpd officers were still
[7:49:58] on the scene of the convenience store.
[7:49:59] and this is my understanding, the situation when the marshals
[7:50:02] and park police left looking for the individual.
[7:50:06] so mpd was still at the at the convenience store when that
[7:50:09] happened. When that happened, canvasing
[7:50:10] for the individual. And let me ask you, why were the
[7:50:13] u.s. Marshals and park police authorized to respond to this
[7:50:17] call without mpd being present? So mpd was present at the
[7:50:21] convenience store when the call came in.
[7:50:22] they got the call, was dispatched.
[7:50:24] I know what I mean. When they decided to leave, I
[7:50:26] guess there were they responding to a lookout when they went to
[7:50:29] go? Yeah.
[7:50:30] and again, some of this is going to be a bit of assumption.
[7:50:32] my assumption is that there is a lookout or some information that
[7:50:34] was shared about the person that we're looking for.
[7:50:36] I don't know if it was over the radio or if it was on the scene.
[7:50:39] those are things that the investigation will ferret out
[7:50:42] with that. But park police has the
[7:50:45] authority. Park police has has the same as
[7:50:47] the metropolitan police department across the city.
[7:50:49] so they they don't need us to take police action.
[7:50:52] they don't need us to take police action anywhere in the
[7:50:54] city. They can do that unilaterally
[7:50:57] without us. Why they chose to do that and
[7:50:58] what they chose to do. I don't have that information.
[7:51:00] obviously, part of the actual investigation into that
[7:51:03] shooting, those types of questions will be will be asked.
[7:51:06] and so if my thing is, if they responded to the original scene
[7:51:11] at convenience store and they were further investigating, and
[7:51:15] that's further investigation led them to looking for the
[7:51:18] individual. Wouldn't mpd also be looking for
[7:51:21] whatever individual they were looking for, and why would they
[7:51:24] not be accompanying the other entities in looking for that
[7:51:27] individual? I just I don't understand how
[7:51:29] mpd was not on the scene of the shooting, you mean.
[7:51:32] yes, of the shooting. My understanding is they were
[7:51:34] still on scene gathering information from the initial
[7:51:36] complainant. So the victim that called 911
[7:51:39] about the the firearm or whatever the initial police call
[7:51:42] was, they were still on the scene interviewing that that
[7:51:45] that complainant when the other when the park police and the
[7:51:47] marshals went to look. So what normally would happen in
[7:51:50] a case like that, if it was mpd officers and another officer
[7:51:53] from mpd had come to the scene and they went to canvass, is you
[7:51:56] would make sure the officers that are on the scene of the
[7:51:58] convenience store, they would obtain all the information
[7:52:00] needed for the police report. If an individual was identified
[7:52:03] and there needed to be a show up or have a detective come to the
[7:52:06] scene, they would then coordinate with getting that
[7:52:08] complaint or that victim to that location.
[7:52:10] right? So that's what I mean.
[7:52:12] I'm just trying to understand why they would be I'm trying to
[7:52:16] make sure why would they be canvasing?
[7:52:18] this is a this originated from a 911 call, which means mpd would
[7:52:23] be responding, as you all do, to 911 calls.
[7:52:26] and if you all were in investigation and there was a
[7:52:29] canvass, usually there's officers who stay on scene,
[7:52:33] collect information, and then their officers who go canvass.
[7:52:37] was mpd not instructed to canvass.
[7:52:40] and holly, that's what I'm trying to figure out.
[7:52:42] it would be that mpd would have been canvasing for an individual
[7:52:46] alongside these officers. So I'm saying, were they
[7:52:49] canvasing for mpd? I don't know, specifically mpd
[7:52:52] directed them or they just heard it and went canvasing again.
[7:52:55] that'll be something. The investigation has.
[7:52:57] it wouldn't be out of the realm for possibility if they heard
[7:52:59] the lookout to go look for it, or if the officers on the scene
[7:53:02] said, hey, we're looking for an individual x, y, z related to
[7:53:05] this. Like those details I don't have.
[7:53:07] it would not be unusual though, for either way they could have
[7:53:10] just heard it and went. I do know that they did come by
[7:53:13] the convenience store before they they later located the
[7:53:16] individual, but what that exact conversation, what it looks
[7:53:18] like, I don't know, that'll be part of the investigation
[7:53:21] because my fear in the public fear is that mpd can then use
[7:53:26] federal agents to do canvasing and follow up, and in doing so,
[7:53:30] then you all those individuals are not accountable to d.c.
[7:53:35] government d.c. Council. But in in addition, they're not
[7:53:37] going to have body worn camera. And so now we will be left
[7:53:42] without evidence and information if you all are in fact using
[7:53:45] federal agents to do canvasing work of metropolitan police
[7:53:49] officers. So my real question is, is that
[7:53:51] the case? Are we using hpsci and us
[7:53:55] marshals and park police to do canvasing work in cases?
[7:53:59] because if so, then future residents are at risk of being
[7:54:02] at home and being killed without any body worn camera being
[7:54:06] present. Yeah.
[7:54:07] so so two things with that. So it's definitely not out of
[7:54:09] the realm of possibility for other agencies to be out there.
[7:54:12] for example, if ebola comes out for a robbery.
[7:54:15] no. If they go out, they if they do
[7:54:17] it. But if I want to make sure our
[7:54:20] officers mpd is not directing federal officers to do
[7:54:24] canvasing, do work that they are either not on scene,
[7:54:28] accompanying them and allowing them to go out and do
[7:54:31] investigations alone because that creates a very real threat
[7:54:34] to our community, because there is no there is no accountability
[7:54:39] if if our officers are not present, there's no body worn
[7:54:41] camera evidence. If our officers are not present.
[7:54:43] and that is a way to impede the transparency that we we require
[7:54:49] as district residents. No, no, I understand.
[7:54:50] I just don't want to make sure that I'm clear that it is
[7:54:53] possible. For example, if a robbery came
[7:54:55] out and we broadcast a lookout, or we send out a bolo or be on
[7:54:58] the lookout, that capital police park police would not get that.
[7:55:01] and they could then be canvasing or looking for that person.
[7:55:04] that happens all the time where they may have an individual
[7:55:06] they're looking for, they send to us and they're officers
[7:55:08] looking for or we have one. We push out to the regional law
[7:55:11] enforcement, metro transit park police.
[7:55:13] once that gets there, there could be federal agents or
[7:55:15] others that get those things. Second part of that is there are
[7:55:18] other agencies like park police that do have body worn cameras.
[7:55:22] again, not the same controls from the council like we have.
[7:55:24] so that I definitely understand that concern.
[7:55:27] but there are there are other agencies that do have body worn
[7:55:29] cameras that would provide information potentially in this
[7:55:32] incident. Do we know if there is body worn
[7:55:34] camera available for this? The incident involving mr.
[7:55:37] bailey? My understanding there is some
[7:55:39] from park police. Okay.
[7:55:42] and is that information? Is that evidence going to be
[7:55:46] shared with the dc council. That's not again, that's not mpd
[7:55:50] was not on the scene of that. That's not our information to
[7:55:53] share with anybody. That's information that internal
[7:55:55] affairs would get. They would share with the u.s.
[7:55:57] attorney's office how park police and what their procedures
[7:55:59] are as far as body worn camera release.
[7:56:01] that's that's up to them. I don't specifically know what
[7:56:04] they are because they did not discharge that situation.
[7:56:07] they were on the scene, though, as my understanding.
[7:56:10] and how long after they responded to the scene, how long
[7:56:14] did it take for mpd to get to the scene of the shooting or of
[7:56:18] of the not the convenience store, but the subsequent murder
[7:56:21] that occurred? I don't know the exact time.
[7:56:23] it was a short time thereafter. I would say within minutes or a
[7:56:27] minute or two, but I can't say exactly.
[7:56:31] okay, as soon as the shooting happened, they went over the
[7:56:34] radio. So I think the officers that
[7:56:36] were in the area actually heard gunshots.
[7:56:39] okay, mpd officers that were in the area, okay.
[7:56:43] I just want to make sure and I think you understand and
[7:56:45] appreciate what I'm saying about making sure, given that the the
[7:56:49] radios are open and given the lack of transparency and
[7:56:52] accountability that comes from mpd not being on scene, that
[7:56:56] this is some this is why we need to make sure that we are not
[7:57:01] utilizing federal law enforcement for any of our
[7:57:04] investigations, because it puts our community at risk.
[7:57:06] no. And I and I think to the point
[7:57:08] that was made earlier by some other council members and to
[7:57:11] your point, like, you know, the reason why mpd is going out with
[7:57:14] them is to try to mitigate issues like this, because we
[7:57:17] have seen in other places, when they go out on their own, there
[7:57:20] are challenges. Now.
[7:57:21] park police, does police in the city on their own.
[7:57:23] but I think to your point, you're absolutely right.
[7:57:25] when you have federal agencies going on their own and doing
[7:57:27] their own thing, there's challenges.
[7:57:29] the marshals do not normally respond to.
[7:57:31] nine one calls. Park police do.
[7:57:33] but with that being said, there are challenges.
[7:57:35] so that's why I think, you know, trying to work with them to to
[7:57:38] make sure we can do our best within the confines to keep the
[7:57:41] community safe as possible and drive the areas is better than
[7:57:44] just letting them do their own thing.
[7:57:45] correct? Ward 4 school communities have
[7:57:49] reported mpd officers accompanying federal immigration
[7:57:52] agents near schools. We have had incidents
[7:57:55] throughout, including e.l. Haynes.
[7:57:57] we've had incidents outside of many of our child care centers,
[7:58:00] including estrellita and d.c., bilingual, as well.
[7:58:04] you all are creating lifelong in addition to trauma that's being
[7:58:09] created for our young people, you all are also creating
[7:58:13] lifelong distrust of an entire generation.
[7:58:16] in doing so, what is the current controlling written mpd policy
[7:58:21] governing mpd officers activity during federal immigration law
[7:58:25] enforcement near schools and daycare centers and other
[7:58:29] sensitive locations of that nature?
[7:58:31] yes, mpd is our policy is, as I spoke of earlier, it's
[7:58:34] controlled by the law. We are not engaged in civil
[7:58:37] immigration enforcement. We are not asking people what
[7:58:39] their immigration status is. With that being said, there
[7:58:43] could be ice people that are on their own, or they could be with
[7:58:45] other law enforcement agencies. We are not in joint patrols with
[7:58:49] ice ero. We have not been since the end
[7:58:51] of the emergency. As we talked about.
[7:58:53] with that being said, I know there's a lot of federal
[7:58:55] agencies that are out there. They wear tactical vest and
[7:58:56] things like that, and sometimes there's confusion or lack of
[7:58:59] clarity of of who some of these agencies are, which obviously is
[7:59:02] a concern to us, too, because the incident that occurred
[7:59:05] outside of d.c. Bilingual was that an incident that was a
[7:59:08] traffic stop, or was that an incident where federal federal
[7:59:12] immigration law enforcement was happening?
[7:59:14] my understanding is that was a traffic stop.
[7:59:16] where then other individuals came in there and turned it into
[7:59:20] a immigration incident. How did it get turned into that
[7:59:23] from a traffic stop, much like we talked about before, as far
[7:59:26] as the information sharing that the officers on the scene do
[7:59:29] what they do, and then other agencies use their own
[7:59:33] authorities to do what they whatever federal authorities
[7:59:35] they have as far as immigration, that's my understanding of it.
[7:59:38] I do know it is a subject of, I believe, an investigation within
[7:59:42] the department still. Yeah.
[7:59:44] you do understand the that these things happening near schools,
[7:59:48] the impact that it has on our young children, not only the
[7:59:51] trauma but that lifelong distrust of an entire generation
[7:59:54] that is occurring as a result of this.
[7:59:56] no, absolutely. I mean, I think some of it is
[7:59:58] perception, if it's true or not. I think the perception that's
[8:00:01] out there does its damage in and of itself.
[8:00:03] so we're keenly, keenly aware, like I said this, this is not a
[8:00:06] situation where the police department wants to be in a
[8:00:09] situation we find ourselves. We also had a conversation
[8:00:12] because there is a the warrant. What's the task force that does
[8:00:15] the warrants? So there's a couple, but the
[8:00:17] capital area regional fugitive task force cardiff, you're the
[8:00:20] ones that usually look for very. We had a conversation earlier in
[8:00:23] the year where they were doing warrants and the really early
[8:00:27] morning hours, and specifically during the time parents and
[8:00:31] families were going to and from school.
[8:00:33] I was told that you all would inform the the warrant task
[8:00:38] force to stop doing executing warrants on and around schools,
[8:00:42] especially during morning drop off and pick up.
[8:00:44] but we still have heard incidents of that happening.
[8:00:48] have you instructed them to not do those warrants during
[8:00:54] literally pick up and drop off near our schools?
[8:00:58] and and why is it still occurring?
[8:01:00] yes. So I do know we have shared
[8:01:02] those concerns. Again, we don't control what
[8:01:04] they do. We're not in charge of the
[8:01:06] federal agencies out there and there are others.
[8:01:07] so there's there's cardiff, but there are other superior court
[8:01:10] martials groups that are out there too.
[8:01:11] and then sometimes there's tactical groups that go out
[8:01:13] there. With that being said, we have
[8:01:14] shared the concerns with the task force, especially about in
[8:01:17] the area of schools in general. We've also seen concerns like
[8:01:20] that from just national guard deployments that sometimes go
[8:01:23] past schools and citizens that raise concerns about that.
[8:01:26] so we realize those concerns that people see that and they
[8:01:29] assume certain things are happening, why they continue to
[8:01:31] do or why there's instances that pop up that's not mpd deploying
[8:01:35] that or so I can't give you an answer to that, but I do know we
[8:01:37] have shared those concerns. Are our ice and homeland
[8:01:42] security investigations participating directly or
[8:01:45] indirectly in the sboe or task force work streams.
[8:01:51] the task force so twofold hsc is in the task force.
[8:01:56] there is esro. They are on the task force.
[8:01:59] we are not in any groups with the ice ero, and we have not
[8:02:02] been since the end of the emergency.
[8:02:04] so but they are still out there. They are working with other
[8:02:07] agencies that are out there in the city.
[8:02:09] we are not part of those groups. Hsc is out there also as well,
[8:02:13] and my understanding is hsc is also ice.
[8:02:17] yes, hsc is the homeland security.
[8:02:18] so there's kind of two portions of that agency.
[8:02:20] one is homeland security investigations.
[8:02:23] they focus on investigations, different criminal matters.
[8:02:26] the ice enforcement removal operations.
[8:02:28] those are the folks that people locally say call ice or their
[8:02:31] job is to go out and do immigration enforcement and
[8:02:35] removal operations. So then you all are cooperating
[8:02:39] then with federal immigration. If hsc is ice, you all, then you
[8:02:45] all are cooperating. No.
[8:02:47] and we've been very clear that we've been working with ice.
[8:02:49] we've been very clear from the officer involved shootings that
[8:02:51] we talked. Wait a minute.
[8:02:52] you just told councilmember parker.
[8:02:53] no, no, no, no, let's be clear on this.
[8:02:55] we've talked about officer involved shootings with hsc and
[8:02:58] our responses. We've been very clear.
[8:03:00] we are working with sai. Sai is not out doing immigration
[8:03:05] enforcement. We are not going out with them
[8:03:07] for that purpose. Ikaros job is to go out and do
[8:03:10] immigration enforcement. They are the civil immigration
[8:03:13] enforcement and we are not on teams with them.
[8:03:14] and we've been very clear about that.
[8:03:16] and there are other agencies, and I've said this before
[8:03:18] because I don't want there to be confusion.
[8:03:20] this question seems to come up a lot.
[8:03:21] there are other agencies, the marshals, the park police that
[8:03:24] do have the legal authority to do those things.
[8:03:27] we are not going out with the intention of them to go do civil
[8:03:31] immigration enforcement. But could they do that while
[8:03:33] they're there? They could.
[8:03:34] we cannot stop them from doing so.
[8:03:35] can you all stop working with sai right now?
[8:03:39] we are still on task force with sai.
[8:03:41] I'm saying at this point, moving forward, since there is an
[8:03:44] intention to not be cooperating with federal law enforcement,
[8:03:48] immigration, and that is our policy as a city, as our laws
[8:03:53] respect it. Can we end at least can we agree
[8:03:56] for you all to end the coordination you currently have
[8:04:00] with sai, who is acting as ice, whether named directly ice or
[8:04:05] not. Sai has that ability.
[8:04:06] will you all agree to end the cooperation with sai moving
[8:04:10] forward so that we don't have you all participating and
[8:04:15] coordinating with federal immigration law enforcement,
[8:04:17] which sai is? We have been working with sai
[8:04:20] before this on investigation. No, I know, but so I don't think
[8:04:23] that people are trying to push that into the same, same vein at
[8:04:26] this point. Sai is not going out there and
[8:04:28] doing it. Could they?
[8:04:29] there is a possibility. There is a possibility the park
[8:04:31] police could. There is the possibility of
[8:04:32] marshals could. So again, we're always
[8:04:34] evaluating what we're doing and where we can be at and what's
[8:04:37] best overall. As far as part of the task
[8:04:39] force, we do not want to be in a situation.
[8:04:41] as I've said before, okay. Thank you.
[8:04:44] councilmember pinto. Thank you, councilor lewis
[8:04:49] george, councilmember robert white, thank you so much.
[8:04:52] councilmember pinto. Thank you, chief carroll.
[8:04:55] yes, I apologize, I've been chairing a hearing on public
[8:04:59] housing since 9:30 a.m. Got to run right back to that
[8:05:03] after I finished. I'm now more confused about who
[8:05:07] we are and are not cooperating with.
[8:05:11] but let me start here. There was a washington post
[8:05:13] article today identifying two separate issues where a latino
[8:05:21] immigrant was arrested by ice or inside of mpd stations after
[8:05:28] routine interactions with mpd. One was a gentleman who had a
[8:05:31] car stolen, was apparently told, come to the station and pick up
[8:05:36] your car, only to be arrested there by a team that included an
[8:05:41] officer with an ice shirt, and then another man who was stopped
[8:05:45] for an expired license process, told he was free to go, and then
[8:05:51] immediately re-arrested in the station.
[8:05:53] by hpsci both accounts, you know, are documented in sworn
[8:05:59] declarations. How would federal agents know to
[8:06:03] come to mpd station if not through communication from mpd?
[8:06:09] yeah. So I'm sorry this question did
[8:06:11] come up a little bit, kind of this similar question earlier.
[8:06:14] with that. Again, these two specific
[8:06:16] situations, I don't have the answer.
[8:06:17] I don't have the specific knowledge of them.
[8:06:19] I do know was referenced that there is an article came out
[8:06:21] this afternoon about that. With that being said, and again,
[8:06:24] anything that I give, it would be conjecture of what it could
[8:06:27] be, right? Obviously, it could be that
[8:06:29] there were members of federal law enforcement that were on the
[8:06:31] scene when the arrests were made, and they would know that
[8:06:33] they would be leaving the station.
[8:06:34] right. There are several things that
[8:06:36] could happen to lead to that. What needs to happen to have a
[8:06:39] definitive answer is needs to be an investigation to determine
[8:06:42] what are the nuances of this and how did this happen?
[8:06:44] anything I give is going to be conjecture.
[8:06:48] so has ice. I'd say since august of 25 has
[8:06:53] ice or any other federal immigration enforcement agency
[8:06:57] conducted any civil immigration arrests when the premises of an
[8:07:01] mpd station? Not to my knowledge, they
[8:07:03] haven't. Okay.
[8:07:04] and again, I'm not at every station, but I have no knowledge
[8:07:06] of that happening. Since august 25th.
[8:07:09] has mpd ever shared with the personally identifying
[8:07:13] information of an individual with ice or any other federal
[8:07:16] immigration enforcement agency? Not to my knowledge, we have not
[8:07:20] since they've been in custody, obviously.
[8:07:22] and again, I want to make sure we're clear because I know
[8:07:24] questions come up during the emergency.
[8:07:26] there were ice individuals, ice ero that we were working with.
[8:07:30] since that time, we have not been working with ice.
[8:07:33] ero to your question about other other organizations that conduct
[8:07:36] civil immigration authority, I think that's where it gets a
[8:07:38] little confusing, because there are agencies like I've spoken
[8:07:41] about park police, marshals, to name a few, that can, if they
[8:07:45] choose to do civil immigration enforcement.
[8:07:47] our goal by being deployed and going out with any of those
[8:07:50] agencies, many of which we've worked with for many years prior
[8:07:53] to this, is not to go out and do civil immigration enforcement,
[8:07:56] but could someone of that group then take and switch on that?
[8:08:00] absolutely. Could.
[8:08:01] the law is specific that we are not allowed to share information
[8:08:05] once an individual is in custody.
[8:08:07] our custody and we are not allowed to ask about a person's
[8:08:11] immigration status and what is in custody.
[8:08:13] mean in custody means under arrest in police custody.
[8:08:17] okay, so if someone had a car stolen and they went to mpd to
[8:08:21] pick up their car, they would not be in custody.
[8:08:23] that's correct. They're not in custody.
[8:08:26] and so they're not in custody. Would you or could you share
[8:08:30] their information with civil immigration enforcement?
[8:08:33] legally we could. But again, I don't want you to
[8:08:35] take in or anyone to take that and extract back that we did
[8:08:38] that. We have to investigate it to see
[8:08:40] exactly what happened. That's in there, because there's
[8:08:42] lots of ways there could have been a marshal on the scene when
[8:08:46] the report was taken, and they know that.
[8:08:47] and then they did their own investigation to do that.
[8:08:49] so there's there's several ways it could happen.
[8:08:51] I just want to make sure that I'm not trying to give the
[8:08:54] appearance of something that it's not.
[8:08:57] does hsv ii do civil immigration enforcement?
[8:09:02] my understanding is that no, they don't.
[8:09:04] they're general. No, I want to be clear.
[8:09:06] my their general response has always been homeland security
[8:09:09] investigations. Could they do it?
[8:09:10] absolutely. They could.
[8:09:11] could the marshals do it? Absolutely.
[8:09:13] they could. Could the park police do it?
[8:09:15] they have the legal authority. There are agencies.
[8:09:18] if you asked this question about hhc six years ago, we wouldn't
[8:09:21] be having this conversation because there was never any
[8:09:24] blurring of the lines. But at this point they could
[8:09:27] they don't do it. Generally, but could.
[8:09:30] but to your to, to your knowledge, see is not currently
[8:09:37] doing civil immigration enforcement.
[8:09:38] that's correct. Okay.
[8:09:46] let me let me move to a different issue.
[8:09:51] we have had in the past year. Many advocates have shared that
[8:09:56] there have been several incidences, incidents where
[8:10:00] federal agents have used force in dc neighborhoods, including
[8:10:05] shootings at drivers who turned out to be an unarmed flash bangs
[8:10:09] used in residential neighborhoods.
[8:10:11] in the case of philip brown, mpd officers were on the scene.
[8:10:16] from the community's perspective, they see mpd
[8:10:20] uniforms and they reasonably expect district officials to be
[8:10:23] able to explain who used force, what police policies applied,
[8:10:28] and what accountability followed.
[8:10:32] but in that incident, the police report did not include details
[8:10:37] about the shooting. Is that correct?
[8:10:41] I just want to make sure. Which incident are we talking
[8:10:43] about? This is the one shooting, this
[8:10:46] shooting of philip brown. Yeah.
[8:10:47] I'm sorry this came up. I think councilwoman parker
[8:10:50] asked a similar question about the report.
[8:10:52] and then there's a second report that was taken by internal
[8:10:54] affairs about a discharge of a firearm.
[8:10:58] so the the initial police report did not include mention of of a
[8:11:04] shooting. So that's my understanding.
[8:11:06] we had a conversation about this a little bit ago.
[8:11:08] so the initial report, based on the conversation we had did not
[8:11:12] reference the shooting. There was mpd, internal affairs
[8:11:15] did respond to the officer involved shooting.
[8:11:17] there was a report taken for discharge of a firearm of a
[8:11:20] service weapon that's out there. A press release was done about
[8:11:23] the officer involved shooting as we do, even though it's not
[8:11:25] ours. Saying that we are investigating
[8:11:28] that that's that's the case. I think that you're talking
[8:11:30] about. And so.
[8:11:33] there is an investigation. So the follow up for the council
[8:11:36] member was clarity on is there an investigation and what the
[8:11:39] status of that was. He had asked.
[8:11:40] so that's that's a follow up that due back to him within the
[8:11:42] next week or so. Okay.
[8:11:43] but right now you don't know whether I again, I don't I don't
[8:11:46] want to misspeak and say one way or the other.
[8:11:48] I'm not sure on that. So I'd rather make sure we give
[8:11:50] you accurate information. So if somebody was shot at in
[8:11:53] the district of columbia, would you be concerned if there is not
[8:11:59] an investigation? No.
[8:12:00] so there is an investigation. I'm sorry.
[8:12:02] so there is an investigation into the shooting.
[8:12:04] so a little bit about that. So the shooting, the discharge
[8:12:06] of the firearm, internal affairs for any agency, mpd or not,
[8:12:10] they'll respond to the scene and do an initial investigation when
[8:12:13] it's a non mpd agency. Hpsci the marshall's, the fbi,
[8:12:18] park police, whoever it is, they'll go, they'll gather the
[8:12:21] information. They'll then present that
[8:12:22] information to the united states attorney's office, united states
[8:12:25] attorney's office will make a charging decision.
[8:12:27] or are they going to charge the individual criminally, or are
[8:12:29] they going to issue a declination?
[8:12:31] if declination is issued and relates that incident, then that
[8:12:34] is then turned over to the home agency.
[8:12:36] when I say home agency, that's the agency that the the officer
[8:12:39] or the agent is assigned to for them to conduct an
[8:12:42] administrative investigation to determine was the discharge of
[8:12:45] firearm in violation or in compliance with their
[8:12:48] administrative policies. So in this case, a declaration
[8:12:50] was issued by the united states attorney's office based on the
[8:12:54] initial information gathered by internal affairs that has been
[8:12:56] turned over to c for their administrative investigation
[8:13:00] into was there a policy or procedure violation with that?
[8:13:03] but thank you for for all of that.
[8:13:05] but I'm still not clear on whether you are concerned about
[8:13:10] whether or not there is a d.c. Investigation about someone
[8:13:14] being shot at in dc. No, I'm I'm sorry, I'm not clear
[8:13:19] on what your question is. If someone is shot at in dc,
[8:13:23] should there be an investigation?
[8:13:25] yes, there should be. If a police officer shoots
[8:13:27] agencies. So if a government if a police
[8:13:29] officer shoots at, there should be an investigation.
[8:13:31] in this case, there was an investigation.
[8:13:33] there was a criminal investigation that a declination
[8:13:35] was issued. That investigation was done by
[8:13:37] mpd. A declination was issued.
[8:13:39] so that criminal investigation is now over.
[8:13:41] and now there's administrative investigation that will be done
[8:13:44] by in this case, c. So there was a criminal
[8:13:47] investigation completed. It was presented to the united
[8:13:49] states attorney's office here in the district of columbia.
[8:13:51] and they issued a declaration to that criminal investigation.
[8:13:54] what's the declination? A declination is declination to
[8:13:57] prosecute. It's a determination by the
[8:13:58] united states attorney's office that they will not prosecute in
[8:14:01] this case. Okay.
[8:14:03] so if someone civilian is in dc, unarmed, get shot at and is not
[8:14:10] prosecuted, does that cause you concern?
[8:14:13] I mean, I'm sorry. Say that again.
[8:14:15] if someone is in dc, they get shot at.
[8:14:18] the shooter is not prosecuted. Does that cause you concern?
[8:14:22] yeah, I think in general it would cause me concern.
[8:14:25] I know where you're going with this line of questioning, but
[8:14:28] our our position, our job is to gather the facts and present it
[8:14:31] to the united states attorney's office.
[8:14:32] we do not make charging decisions if they want to charge
[8:14:36] individuals criminally or not. Our job is to gather facts to
[8:14:39] date that information to present it to them.
[8:14:41] well, I got to challenge that because I've heard a lot of
[8:14:43] opinions about declining to charge d.c. Residents from mpd
[8:14:48] over the years, and now you're telling me, well, we don't opine
[8:14:52] on that, but that's just not true.
[8:14:53] well, sir, I'm not saying I've never, never brought that to
[8:14:56] you. I'm not saying that no police
[8:14:57] officer ever does. I think that'd be disingenuous.
[8:14:59] with that being said, I definitely think there's always
[8:15:01] concerns. But again, the nuances of the
[8:15:04] investigation, that's the facts that are presented.
[8:15:06] united states attorney's office, there are cases that happen in
[8:15:09] homicide cases where individuals are not prosecuted.
[8:15:11] that's the determination of the facts being brought to the u.s.
[8:15:14] attorney's office. And that's their determination
[8:15:16] if they're going to prosecute or not.
[8:15:17] well, we have heard I mean, hearing after hearing over the
[8:15:22] years criticism from mpd leadership about federal
[8:15:26] prosecutors, not prosecuting people who commit crimes in d.c.
[8:15:30] and I'm not hearing that here. And this is serious.
[8:15:35] no, 100%. I'm not going to sit here and
[8:15:37] criticize the prosecutor about their decisions.
[8:15:38] I don't have the insight to know exactly what was presented to
[8:15:41] them, but the information was presented to them, and they had
[8:15:44] that determination to determine, do they want to charge
[8:15:47] criminally or not? I definitely understand your
[8:15:49] position with that, but our position is we have to gather
[8:15:52] the information just like we do. In any case, there are cases
[8:15:55] where of all kinds of things that are presented to the us
[8:15:58] attorney's office and for a variety of reasons, the
[8:16:00] decisions are made not to pursue charges.
[8:16:02] so as far as I understand, an unarmed man was shot at in d.c.
[8:16:09] that man was a father. He is traumatized.
[8:16:12] his mother cried in my office, and the prosecutors, federal
[8:16:18] prosecutors have determined that they are that the federal
[8:16:21] officer who shot at this man in d.c.
[8:16:25] did not commit a crime. I can't even make sense of that.
[8:16:31] and there seems to be no outrage from the government officials.
[8:16:36] I mean, that that is concerning. No, I mean, it's not lack of
[8:16:39] empathy on our part. But again, we we have a job to
[8:16:43] do and we have to present that to the u.s. Attorney's office.
[8:16:45] they have that information. I don't have all the specific
[8:16:48] information that's out there. I didn't do the investigation.
[8:16:50] regardless, we do need consistency.
[8:16:52] if this was if I shot at somebody in the street and they
[8:16:56] determined they weren't going to prosecute me, I think you'd have
[8:16:58] something to say about it. It does happen.
[8:17:01] and again, that's up to us. And we go back to u.s.
[8:17:03] attorney's office when we have cases and we present the
[8:17:05] information, but it's not for us to go out and to make that
[8:17:08] determination. It is their right and
[8:17:10] responsibility to do that. I definitely understand the
[8:17:13] concern, but it's a big concern. This inconsistency is is scary.
[8:17:17] we don't want to be in this situation.
[8:17:18] and I've said it before, we don't want to be in this
[8:17:20] situation that we're in as far as a city, but we're there.
[8:17:23] so, you know, on the mpd perspective, we're trying to do
[8:17:25] as much as we can to try to mitigate as we're out there.
[8:17:28] right. So being with the federal
[8:17:30] agencies and trying to mitigate and put them in areas where we
[8:17:34] need the assistance, where we're having issues and challenges and
[8:17:36] having to work within those confines.
[8:17:40] okay. So.
[8:17:43] no note, no opinion on federal prosecutors declining to
[8:17:48] prosecute. What about the flashbangs used
[8:17:51] in the residential neighborhood? Is is that a concern?
[8:17:54] are we investigating that? What's the status?
[8:17:57] mpd is not investigating that. That's I believe the fbi had
[8:18:00] some sort of an operation that they were conducting there.
[8:18:03] I'm not sure if the fbi is investigating that.
[8:18:05] there was some sort of an arrest that was made.
[8:18:07] is my understanding related to that?
[8:18:12] so when when there's a use of force by, let's say, federal law
[8:18:18] enforcement, should there be a use of force report done by mpd,
[8:18:23] not by mpd? No, we don't have the
[8:18:25] information. I mean, again, different federal
[8:18:28] law enforcement agencies have different policies.
[8:18:30] my understanding is that some of them do use of force reports.
[8:18:32] I don't know what that looks like.
[8:18:33] I would imagine there's probably differences between the
[8:18:36] different agencies, but what their administrative process is,
[8:18:39] I don't know. So I can't really speak to it.
[8:18:40] we do what I can tell you that what this sounds like there was
[8:18:44] the wild west, because if if I use force in the street, there's
[8:18:49] going to be an investigation and arrest and prosecution.
[8:18:52] if you or your officers use force, there should be a use of
[8:18:55] force report. But if federal officers can do
[8:18:57] whatever they want, and we're not going to take a position on
[8:19:00] that, that's not what I said. I said we would investigate
[8:19:02] this. I don't know, I can't say if the
[8:19:04] fbi does an investigation or not.
[8:19:05] I don't know the answer to that. They shouldn't.
[8:19:07] you know the answer and shouldn't I know the answer?
[8:19:10] I mean, I don't work for the fbi.
[8:19:12] I don't know that I don't know if the fbi has been asked about
[8:19:15] what they're how they investigate their things.
[8:19:17] I don't have that answer. So I can't really speak to it.
[8:19:21] so if if a d.c. Resident gets shot and their family comes to
[8:19:26] me and they get shot by a federal officer, could I say it
[8:19:30] was shot by federal officer, not a local officer.
[8:19:33] so nothing I can do there? No.
[8:19:35] but you also wouldn't say go to mpd and ask them why the federal
[8:19:38] agency shot them. I don't have that information.
[8:19:40] they don't follow the same training that we have.
[8:19:42] they don't follow the same policies and procedures that we
[8:19:45] have. They don't have the same
[8:19:46] requirements that we have. So I can't speak to that.
[8:19:49] are you prohibited from investigating?
[8:19:52] would there be nothing to investigate?
[8:19:54] you're allowed to use force under the color of law.
[8:19:56] so again, in the serious use of force aspect, we do, but we have
[8:19:59] nothing to investigate. Mpd is down almost 800 officers
[8:20:03] from compared to where I'm at now.
[8:20:05] their job is not to go back into reinvestigate in cases of
[8:20:08] serious use of force, where there's a loss of life, an
[8:20:10] officer involved shooting. We definitely do investigate and
[8:20:13] that's to bring that criminal forward.
[8:20:14] that's the same that we would do for any sort of situation.
[8:20:16] if it was mpd member or not, but every single use of force that
[8:20:20] any federal law enforcement agency does.
[8:20:22] how we define a serious use of force and how they define a
[8:20:25] serious use of force will be different.
[8:20:27] what's reportable under mpd policies and is reported on any
[8:20:29] other agencies policies will be different.
[8:20:31] so again, those are things that we have no control over.
[8:20:34] you know, we can't say what their policies are.
[8:20:37] I definitely understand the concern, but I'm asking we've
[8:20:38] handled it that way. No federal officers fire a
[8:20:44] weapon at someone in d.c. Are you prohibited from
[8:20:48] investigating? If they shoot a gun at someone?
[8:20:50] we do investigate those things. All officer involved shootings,
[8:20:54] all discharges of a firearm in the district of columbia.
[8:20:56] we do investigate, and we present them to the u.s.
[8:20:59] attorney's office. There's other types of force
[8:21:02] that are out there. There's lots of other force
[8:21:03] that's out there besides the discharge of a firearm.
[8:21:05] that's what did your investigation show when the
[8:21:08] shooting, when the officer shot at phillip brown?
[8:21:11] that's the case we just talked about.
[8:21:12] that's the one where the information was presented to the
[8:21:14] united states attorney's office. They issued a declination.
[8:21:16] in that case, we don't do an administrative investigation.
[8:21:20] we do a criminal investigation that's presented to the united
[8:21:23] states attorney's office, just as we do inside homicide cases
[8:21:25] in any criminal case. And they then have the right to
[8:21:28] make that determination of are they going to pursue charges or
[8:21:31] not? If they don't pursue charges,
[8:21:33] then it goes back to agency, just like an mpd.
[8:21:35] if we have an officer that's involved in an officer involved
[8:21:38] shooting, we're going to present that to the united states
[8:21:40] attorney's office. If they issue a declination,
[8:21:41] then we're going to do an administrative investigation to
[8:21:44] determine is there a policy violation?
[8:21:46] what do we need to do that's going to go to our use of force
[8:21:48] review board? Who's going to make a final
[8:21:50] determination. All right.
[8:21:51] I don't know what the different federal agencies, how they
[8:21:53] handle that administratively. They may have boards.
[8:21:56] they may have things like that. I just don't know.
[8:21:58] so I can't speak to it. My last question, if there is a
[8:22:01] federal threat to d.c. Residents, do you and your
[8:22:04] officers have a duty to protect d.c. Residents?
[8:22:07] absolutely. If there's a threat to the
[8:22:09] residents, we do. Okay.
[8:22:10] thank you. Chief.
[8:22:11] yes, sir. Thank you.
[8:22:12] thank you, councilmember pinto. Great.
[8:22:14] thank you, councilmember white. I'm going to turn to
[8:22:20] councilmember crawford now for a 15 minute round.
[8:22:32] for the past month, including free d.c. Black swan academy,
[8:22:37] trigger project and harriet's wildest dreams, I admire the
[8:22:40] work that you do. And again, thank you all for
[8:22:42] your service and commitment. I want to start by following up
[8:22:46] on some of the testimonies that we heard today.
[8:22:48] so, chief carroll, several public witnesses raised concerns
[8:22:52] about your perceived associations with the proud
[8:22:54] boys. This is not the first time or
[8:22:57] even the second or third time that I've heard this.
[8:22:59] so I just want to provide you with the opportunity to address
[8:23:02] those concerns directly. For the record, can you clarify
[8:23:05] the nature of those claims and state whether you have ever had
[8:23:09] any affiliation or association with that organization?
[8:23:12] no. I appreciate you asking the
[8:23:13] question because I don't know where this comes from.
[8:23:15] I'm not associated with the proud boys, nor have I ever been
[8:23:18] or any other group or organization that's related to
[8:23:20] white supremacy or anything else.
[8:23:23] there was an incident that occurred in there was an
[8:23:26] incident that occurred in 2020, a demonstration where there were
[8:23:29] individuals of the proud boys that were attempting to get to
[8:23:32] other protest groups that were there, and they actually began
[8:23:35] assaulting 3 or 4 female individuals that were there.
[8:23:38] I interceded in that. I deployed oc spray to stop the
[8:23:41] proud boys from assaulting those individuals, and I arrested one
[8:23:44] of those individuals. Additionally, outside of that,
[8:23:46] one of our members was charged as relates to the proud boys.
[8:23:50] I went to court and I testified against that member.
[8:23:52] so I don't know where this, this, this thought that I'm
[8:23:55] associated with the proud boys come from, but I am not.
[8:23:58] so I thank you for asking that. I want to be clear on that.
[8:24:01] and can you just explain also how you're working to maintain
[8:24:05] public trust and confidence in your leadership of mpd?
[8:24:08] no, absolutely. And again, you know, I know the
[8:24:11] performance hearings can always be be be challenging.
[8:24:13] I know there's a variety of views across the community about
[8:24:16] what we should do and how we should do.
[8:24:18] and I know there's a general concern about the federal
[8:24:21] authorities that are here and the things they're doing, and we
[8:24:22] share those concerns with mpd. You know, my goal and what we've
[8:24:26] done in this department for many, many years is try to work
[8:24:28] with the community to see where the issues at, how can we make
[8:24:32] things better? Obviously, there's concerns.
[8:24:33] it's been raised here by many council members about the trust
[8:24:36] and the damage that this is doing, and we definitely are
[8:24:38] concerned about that. And one of our things is ways
[8:24:40] that we can work to try to build that trust back up, because one
[8:24:43] day the federal task force will be gone, whatever it is, and mpd
[8:24:47] will still be here, and we're the ones that are going to be
[8:24:49] left behind. Their officers that have been
[8:24:50] out here every single day trying to deal with the situation and
[8:24:53] to deal with it as tactfully as possible, that are now going to
[8:24:56] be left to after this very challenging situation, to then
[8:24:59] rebuild that trust. So trying to do what we can now
[8:25:01] to continue to build trust. And I understand it's
[8:25:04] challenging. Our officers don't want to be in
[8:25:06] these situations, but they are. And I keep saying that because
[8:25:09] it's so important that people realize that, you know, for me,
[8:25:12] things like doing the community walks, engaging the agencies
[8:25:15] across the city, our citizens advisory council, we have a
[8:25:18] chiefs advisory council, all the districts have advisory councils
[8:25:21] just getting out, talking to them.
[8:25:23] one of the other things is talking to our officers.
[8:25:25] you know, our officers are the ones that are out in the
[8:25:27] community day in and day out, engaging with folks, getting
[8:25:30] ideas. What are things that we can do
[8:25:32] better? What are areas that we can
[8:25:33] improve that we're not going to be perfect always.
[8:25:35] there's always room and things that we can do better.
[8:25:38] and it's our goal to try to do those things.
[8:25:40] so, you know, taking the feedback, doing different war
[8:25:42] walks in different events just to really try to connect and get
[8:25:45] that information. So I look forward in this role.
[8:25:47] I'm here to to doing that, to continue to move those things
[8:25:51] forward and doing our best to continue to strengthen the
[8:25:54] relationship that we have with the community.
[8:25:56] thank you. I appreciate that, and I'll just
[8:25:58] say I've been working with the organizations I named, as well
[8:26:02] as with my colleagues on legislation for next week.
[8:26:06] and I know in the past there's been a perception that no matter
[8:26:11] law enforcement, no matter who they are, supports blue.
[8:26:13] you know, blue supports blue. And I think that is part of the
[8:26:19] perception that people may have when it comes to wanting to
[8:26:22] trust that mpd is there to protect and serve district
[8:26:27] residents, and not just fully cooperate with the federal law
[8:26:31] enforcement. And I don't know if you have any
[8:26:32] thoughts on that, but it's something I've also had to.
[8:26:37] struggle with. I guess, when it comes to like
[8:26:40] fully trusting mpd and making sure that they are there to
[8:26:44] serve our district residents. No, I mean, it's it's it's a
[8:26:49] challenging situation, like law enforcement is law enforcement.
[8:26:50] and we have to cooperate with other agencies.
[8:26:52] we have to work with them. There's agencies that have
[8:26:55] specialized missions. We are a federal district.
[8:26:57] the fbi investigates certain types of crimes.
[8:27:00] the atf investigates certain types of crimes.
[8:27:02] we need their resources and support in those areas.
[8:27:05] where the challenge has really come in.
[8:27:06] is this this proactive, forward facing, street level
[8:27:09] interactions that's really caused the challenge in the
[8:27:12] communities out there. And you hear it here in the
[8:27:15] testimony of the different citizens and community members
[8:27:17] that have testified today. And you hear within the
[8:27:20] department, you know, as far as mpd, we're going to continue to
[8:27:23] work with the community. We have to work with other law
[8:27:26] enforcement agencies collaboratively.
[8:27:27] we don't have to work with ice. Ero and do civil immigration
[8:27:31] enforcement. There's a law that specifically
[8:27:33] prohibits that. That's not an area we want to be
[8:27:34] in. It was much simpler four years
[8:27:36] ago, three years ago, two years ago, when we didn't even have to
[8:27:39] delve in that area at all. But now with these other
[8:27:43] agencies that are out there, it puts us in a situation and
[8:27:45] trying to make sure that our officers have the appropriate
[8:27:48] tools and the appropriate training to keep them to make
[8:27:50] sure they're in compliance with the law, but also make sure that
[8:27:53] people in the community are able to trust mpd.
[8:27:56] thank you. I want to switch to juvenile
[8:27:59] curfew now. So of the 15 curfew zones that
[8:28:03] have been implemented, mpd reports encountering 18 youth
[8:28:07] who would not come into compliance, but zero arrests
[8:28:10] during extended hours if not arrested.
[8:28:13] what actions did mpd take with these young people when they
[8:28:16] refused to come into compliance? Sure.
[8:28:18] so they were either taking home or they're taken to.
[8:28:21] diaries where there's resources there to connect them with for
[8:28:24] at risk behavior. So they weren't they were not
[8:28:26] arrested and there were no arrests in those enhanced hours.
[8:28:28] I believe it's from 8 to 11. Okay.
[8:28:31] so when you say no arrests, because what I heard from some
[8:28:34] youth is that there may be times when youth at the time of a
[8:28:39] curfew violation, are arrested for other offenses that aren't
[8:28:43] the curfew violation. Is that true?
[8:28:45] so, in other words, are you being arrested for other
[8:28:49] offenses during the curfew hours?
[8:28:51] so we didn't have anyone that was arrested.
[8:28:53] we didn't have any juveniles that were arrested during the
[8:28:56] curfew hours for anything else outside of that.
[8:28:58] we did not have that. We did have the juveniles that
[8:29:01] you mentioned that were in violation of the curfew, that
[8:29:03] were either taken home or to doctors to be connected with
[8:29:06] resources, but there were not arrests for other things during
[8:29:08] those time frames. Okay.
[8:29:11] and then similar to council member lewis george, I've heard
[8:29:13] from youth advocacy organizations that negative
[8:29:16] interactions with law enforcement are proven to
[8:29:19] increase a young person's chances of deeper justice system
[8:29:22] involvement. I want to get your thoughts on
[8:29:24] that, and whether you see curfew as a short term stabilization
[8:29:30] tool, a long term use safety strategy, or something else.
[8:29:34] sure. So I see the enhanced curfew as
[8:29:37] a tool, just one tool. It's not the solution to all
[8:29:41] issues. There's a lot of underlying
[8:29:43] issues that we need to we as a city, not the police department,
[8:29:45] necessarily need to address. But of course mpd will be a
[8:29:48] partner like we need to. You know, I have a youth
[8:29:50] advisory council, the chief's youth advisory council, and I've
[8:29:53] met with them a couple of times. One was actually yesterday and
[8:29:56] this issue kind of came up, you know, with juveniles and, you
[8:29:58] know, hanging out and the different meet ups and things
[8:30:00] like that, and, you know, making sure that there's places for
[8:30:03] young people to go where there's, you know, a variety of
[8:30:06] options across the city is one of the things when there's
[8:30:09] nowhere for them to go and things that they feel either
[8:30:11] there's nowhere for them to go or things that they, they don't
[8:30:14] want to do that are available. Then they make these on their
[8:30:18] own kind of events that are out there.
[8:30:19] so I think providing more programing in a variety across
[8:30:22] the city is a way. And I know those are areas that
[8:30:25] when chief smith was here, she was working closely to try to
[8:30:27] think of those things. Those are strategies that myself
[8:30:30] and executive assistant, right. And our youth and family
[8:30:33] engagement division are thinking about.
[8:30:34] what can we do as we get closer to warmer times, because we know
[8:30:36] there's going to be issues. So I look at the enhanced curfew
[8:30:40] as a tool in the toolbox. I don't look at it as the
[8:30:42] overall solution, but it is something that we want to have
[8:30:44] that ability to do when it's needed.
[8:30:46] it is very limited and tailored to the areas that it's in.
[8:30:50] even, you know, if there's five people that are in those areas
[8:30:52] during that time frame, they're not in violation.
[8:30:54] and there are a number of exceptions, but it is a tool
[8:30:57] that does allow us to address some of those issues that are
[8:30:59] out there. Okay.
[8:31:01] and then is this council mandated by law or is this
[8:31:05] something you just do? No, it's something that it's
[8:31:08] something that actually I believe I'm not sure if chief
[8:31:10] conti started or chief smith started, but something that's
[8:31:12] been going on for a while, mpd. So we have members across the
[8:31:15] city that's on there, and we also have some of our high
[8:31:18] school police cadets that's on there as well.
[8:31:20] so it's actually a it's actually a good cross section of young
[8:31:23] people across the city. And they really have some good
[8:31:25] ideas. And, you know, trying to task
[8:31:27] them and leverage them of what we can do.
[8:31:30] because I come to meetings like this and other meetings where
[8:31:32] people ask, what can we do for young people?
[8:31:35] and the conversation I have with them is like, you know, people
[8:31:37] want to do things to help you, to try to mitigate these.
[8:31:40] so, you know, what are the types of things that you would like to
[8:31:42] do. And then also on that, even on
[8:31:44] our side, trying to have them develop a an event or something
[8:31:47] for young people to try to help towards that goal overall.
[8:31:52] so this is my my second month that we've met with them since
[8:31:54] I've been in this seat. But it's, it's it's really good.
[8:31:56] and again, we're trying to not only build the relationship
[8:31:59] between young people and law enforcement because there's a
[8:32:01] lot of misnomers, there's a lot of misnomers in the community
[8:32:03] about law enforcement. So just interacting like police
[8:32:06] officers or people just like everybody else.
[8:32:08] and, you know, we put on these uniforms and we do a job and it
[8:32:11] is our job, but we're people and we have families and we have
[8:32:14] lives and we have interests outside of this.
[8:32:16] and I think having that connection on the human level
[8:32:19] helps people understand each other better.
[8:32:22] and since you mentioned this, I'm also curious about how you
[8:32:28] see the interventions outside of law enforcement.
[8:32:31] like we've heard a lot about dpr's late night hike, violence
[8:32:35] interruption, family support. Like how would you prioritize or
[8:32:39] rank what you would see as interventions that could be
[8:32:44] successful to preventing contact with mpd?
[8:32:46] I mean, honestly, I think all those are I think that different
[8:32:50] young people have different things that they kind of
[8:32:51] gravitate to. There is no like one solution.
[8:32:53] I think that's the challenge. You know, I have I have a
[8:32:55] teenager or two at home myself and completely different things.
[8:32:58] some people want to go out and play basketball.
[8:33:01] some people want to go, you know, just hang out with their
[8:33:03] friends. So there's a variety of things.
[8:33:04] so we have to have a variety of options.
[8:33:06] I think late night hype has been good.
[8:33:09] but again, looking at how can we change that?
[8:33:10] because when we have one location in the city, we get
[8:33:12] these huge numbers of kids that go there and then we have
[8:33:15] challenges. So what can we do to have
[8:33:17] multiple options for children or for young people, not children,
[8:33:20] young people across the city to go to that, maybe it sparks
[8:33:23] their interest or is closer to their neighborhood.
[8:33:25] instead of having to go all the way across the city to to go to
[8:33:28] an event. So again, having more, having
[8:33:30] them spread out, I think it just gives different options for
[8:33:32] different young people. So something that may not grab
[8:33:35] this, this young person may grab the attention of the other one.
[8:33:38] they want to do something. Okay.
[8:33:41] and then shifting back to transparency with federal law
[8:33:44] enforcement, I understand that we can't compel federal officers
[8:33:48] to provide their name and badge number to the public, and when
[8:33:53] residents, my understanding is when residents ask mpd officers
[8:33:56] for the name and badge of federal agents, officers
[8:34:00] typically instruct to for the residents to defer to the
[8:34:03] federal agency for their policy. Have you raised has mpd raised
[8:34:08] concerns with federal partners about public identification
[8:34:12] practices? It has come up as well.
[8:34:14] the concerns about that. There is a concern that we've
[8:34:18] raised, obviously, the covering of the face, the providing the
[8:34:20] information, the vehicles, because most of these concerns
[8:34:23] that come up are when people have things.
[8:34:24] it comes to mpd because people come to us asking questions and
[8:34:28] then we spend a lot of time trying to run down.
[8:34:30] they see a vehicle in the area. They assume it's this
[8:34:33] organization or that even though we're not involved, we do our
[8:34:35] best to try to mediate that and try to share information, share
[8:34:39] concerns with the the federal authorities say no because at
[8:34:41] the end of the day, the same thing, like they're having an
[8:34:44] impact in the community, right. And if they want to be part of
[8:34:46] the task force and work here in the district and like those two
[8:34:49] should be concerns of theirs, just like they are for mpd.
[8:34:53] thank you. And then on, I believe you've
[8:34:57] already been asked on sanctuary act, but have you sought well
[8:35:02] one how is mpd currently interpreting and putting it in
[8:35:05] practice? The district sanctuary values
[8:35:07] act. I'll start there because I
[8:35:09] didn't hear the full round. Sure.
[8:35:10] you already answered this. Yeah.
[8:35:12] so so the law is very specific about mpd coordination.
[8:35:16] once individuals in custody, there can be no coordination, no
[8:35:19] information sharing with civil immigration authorities.
[8:35:22] we cannot ask about individual's immigration status at all.
[8:35:25] so any any sharing of any level information can only happen by
[8:35:28] the law. Before that, we don't turn
[8:35:31] people over from mpd custody into other organizations.
[8:35:36] I know there were some some questions that were raised by
[8:35:38] both councilman white and councilman parker that obviously
[8:35:40] will have to look into that were subject of a washington post
[8:35:44] article. Again, I don't have the
[8:35:46] specifics on those. I you know, there's lots of
[8:35:47] things or reasons that could be. I don't have the answer to that
[8:35:52] specifically. And then has mpd ever sought
[8:35:55] just a legal opinion on the current status of the sanctuary
[8:35:59] act from oag? We haven't I I'm not sure that
[8:36:03] we've asked for their their opinion of the act.
[8:36:05] I don't know what specifically we would ask them.
[8:36:08] I mean, I think the act is legal.
[8:36:10] we have policies that since it came into play that we've put in
[8:36:14] as far as how we make sure that we're in compliance with it.
[8:36:17] obviously, we have our general counsel that also reviews it and
[8:36:21] provides guidance to the agency outside of that as well.
[8:36:23] and they coordinate usually with the oig and other other
[8:36:25] organizations. But we have our own general
[8:36:27] counsel office. Okay.
[8:36:30] most of my questions, I think I was last in this first round
[8:36:33] have been answered. So I will actually yield my
[8:36:37] final 45 seconds back to the chair.
[8:36:40] okay. Thank you so much, councilor
[8:36:42] crawford. Chief carol, I want to give you
[8:36:45] an opportunity. If you want to take a five
[8:36:47] minute bio break, are you sure? Yes, ma'am.
[8:36:52] all right, well, thank you. I'm going to turn back to
[8:36:56] councilmember parker for another round.
[8:36:58] okay. In response to pre-hearing
[8:37:01] question 110, which requested weekly arrest data from joint
[8:37:06] federal mpd patrols, mpd notes that, quote, mpd data does not
[8:37:11] specifically capture the subset of arrests that occurred while a
[8:37:13] task force member was on the scene or on a joint patrol.
[8:37:17] end quote. What was the thinking behind the
[8:37:20] choice not to capture this data? It's we can't we don't have that
[8:37:24] information. It's the same kind of the same
[8:37:26] conversation we had. We don't document when we're on
[8:37:28] the scene with the task force, when we're not on the scene with
[8:37:30] the task force, we document our records management systems,
[8:37:34] arrests, stops, incidents that mpd members take reports for.
[8:37:37] so again, depending on who's there depends on who may take
[8:37:40] that report. This has never been an issue
[8:37:43] obviously before this time frame now.
[8:37:45] so the system was not built for that.
[8:37:47] and I know this is getting at what councilmember pinto was
[8:37:51] asking earlier, what type of lift might it require for mpd
[8:37:55] officers to document those types of.
[8:37:57] we probably have to develop a separate it system to document
[8:38:00] it. Why would it need to be
[8:38:02] separate? Because it either has to be
[8:38:04] separate or have to be billed out somehow.
[8:38:06] anything that generally requires modifications of a records
[8:38:10] management system costs a lot of money and takes a lot of time.
[8:38:12] so there's obviously an input to that to to see what that looks
[8:38:15] like. But whatever the system is now,
[8:38:18] why can't we just record? The x district resident was
[8:38:22] arrested by this partner agency because right now there there
[8:38:27] would be there would be no report that was taken.
[8:38:30] there would be nothing for mpd officer to report.
[8:38:32] there was no crime that occurred.
[8:38:33] there's no information that's there.
[8:38:36] so, for example, if we made that arrest, we would have that
[8:38:38] information. We would have the full
[8:38:39] information of the individual. It almost sounds like what
[8:38:41] you're talking about is us just taking a report and trying to
[8:38:44] get information from a federal agency about the person that
[8:38:47] they arrested, especially if a district resident is being
[8:38:52] detained. It would provide data to us that
[8:38:55] we otherwise don't have right now.
[8:38:56] but again, I mean, mpd role is to really I mean, and again, I'm
[8:39:00] not trying to be facetious, but it sounds like you're saying we
[8:39:02] should go back and reinvestigate what the federal government is
[8:39:04] doing to report that information.
[8:39:06] potentially, we don't have the information about why they had
[8:39:08] the stop, why they didn't have the stop.
[8:39:10] and many of these instances, when we do, we are taking the
[8:39:12] arrest. But again, it's almost like
[8:39:14] we're trying to go back and then get information to take a report
[8:39:17] potentially to say what they said, which we may or may not
[8:39:19] have all the facts and information for.
[8:39:21] I don't think that's a really good idea for us to try to do
[8:39:24] that. I understand the want for the
[8:39:26] information, but I don't know if trying to take a report to try
[8:39:29] to figure out what we think that we observed happening is the
[8:39:32] best way, I think more so to get it from the federal law
[8:39:34] enforcement agencies would be the cleanest way.
[8:39:36] I know there may be challenges to that.
[8:39:42] okay. I'm jumping around a little bit
[8:39:45] in response to pre-hearing question 37, you noted that
[8:39:48] there has been an uptick in juvenile arrests in 2025 by 5%,
[8:39:53] despite the launch of the 2025 mpd juvenile investigative
[8:39:57] response unit. You note in your response that
[8:40:00] teen takeovers are likely responsible for this uptick.
[8:40:04] how are how are these takeovers being addressed through that jr
[8:40:10] unit or other strategies that so so there's a few strategies.
[8:40:14] so some of it a lot of these takeovers that are happening,
[8:40:17] and I think I mentioned in one of the questions is young people
[8:40:20] are going young or others not always young people are going on
[8:40:22] social media and they're putting out teen takeover, navy yard,
[8:40:26] union station, wherever it may be.
[8:40:28] so we're working with our investigative services bureau to
[8:40:31] try to go out and locate those posts.
[8:40:32] so we know potentially is happening, depending on where it
[8:40:35] is, like, what's the appropriate mitigation strategy?
[8:40:37] step one usually is trying to identify the poster and then
[8:40:40] reach out to them to see, you know, what's going on.
[8:40:42] can we get them to take it down? Do they realize the
[8:40:45] repercussions of putting this post up?
[8:40:47] step 2nd may be whatever location they're going to.
[8:40:50] if they're going to union station, do the other law
[8:40:52] enforcement agencies, amtrak, police, for example, they handle
[8:40:55] union station or metro transit police.
[8:40:57] they handle parts of union station.
[8:40:58] are they aware that this is coming so they can make sure
[8:41:01] they have the appropriate deployment and strategies that
[8:41:03] are there to mitigate any issues that may be there?
[8:41:05] so really just trying to work through that.
[8:41:07] the goal is to mitigate on the front end versus trying to
[8:41:10] respond on the back end. We've seen some of the responses
[8:41:13] that have happened on the back end.
[8:41:14] the one that comes to mind is the one where the national guard
[8:41:16] was chasing young people around the navy yard.
[8:41:18] that's not what I want to see. Overall with that.
[8:41:22] so whatever we can do to mitigate that on the front end
[8:41:24] is the preferred method to try to address that.
[8:41:26] I think long term, it's kind of the conversations I was having
[8:41:30] with councilwoman crawford was is really we need some
[8:41:32] strategies to try to give young people other things to do
[8:41:36] besides these these takeovers. Some are saying, bring your
[8:41:39] marijuana, bring your alcohol, those kinds of things.
[8:41:40] so just trying to negate those, and I would agree with you
[8:41:44] fully. And while I don't think this is
[8:41:46] your responsibility, that's the charge I've provided to the
[8:41:49] deputy mayor. Like we're being asked
[8:41:52] authorized or extend a curfew, but we're not being asked to
[8:41:56] expand options for young people. So I agree fully.
[8:41:58] we need to be thinking about more options for them to do
[8:42:03] things responsibly in response to pre-hearing question 180, mpd
[8:42:07] notes that 24 members were arrested in fiscal year 25 and
[8:42:14] 26 to date, there were 21 in fiscal year 25, and it seems
[8:42:18] like three so far in 26. What type of adverse actions are
[8:42:23] taken against members who are arrested?
[8:42:25] yes. So it depends on the type of the
[8:42:28] crime. So again, just like anybody
[8:42:30] else. So when the when they're
[8:42:32] arrested for a crime, administrative investigation
[8:42:35] will be begun, once the criminal investigation has completed,
[8:42:38] similar to some of the other officer involved shooting and
[8:42:41] things like that. If you get arrested, the
[8:42:42] criminal part, once it's done, then the administrative part
[8:42:45] will begin. Depending on what the the
[8:42:47] incident is, it could be everything from, you know,
[8:42:51] suspension to termination. Again, you have to weigh the
[8:42:53] douglas factors, obviously through the, you know, through
[8:42:55] the labor relations regulations and laws, but the information is
[8:42:59] presented if there's sustained allegation of misconduct,
[8:43:01] whatever that may be, depending on what is sustained or which
[8:43:05] charges they may be, multiple charges that are sustained
[8:43:08] depends on the outcome. And of course, they have they're
[8:43:10] depending on if they're in the union or not.
[8:43:11] they have kind of their their protections that are built in
[8:43:14] from the go through that. But it could be everything from
[8:43:17] termination to suspension. Our officers are allowed to
[8:43:20] remain on active duty while under investigation.
[8:43:23] so generally as soon as you're arrested, you're placed on
[8:43:25] what's called non contact. Your police powers are taken
[8:43:27] away. You know, obviously you don't
[8:43:29] have a firearm or anything like that.
[8:43:31] and until such time as is determined that you can return
[8:43:33] to a full duty status, where is the force size as of today, I
[8:43:41] believe it's 3144 47 as of earlier this week.
[8:43:51] and. Obviously that poses challenges
[8:43:54] in terms of capacity for the agency.
[8:43:57] how how is mpd thinking about the size of our force and
[8:44:02] accommodating based on dispatch and or coverage of the district?
[8:44:05] so, I mean, a couple of things is we need to get the numbers
[8:44:08] back up. A lot of the concerns we have
[8:44:09] with these federal folks that are here in the city, if we had
[8:44:12] higher numbers, maybe they wouldn't be here.
[8:44:14] so so it's it's a true priority to try to get more officers into
[8:44:19] the agency. With that being said, there's a
[8:44:20] lot of challenges as far as the hiring bonuses, some of the
[8:44:24] educational requirements, things that I've talked about with
[8:44:28] that, along with that, what needs to happen is we need to
[8:44:31] look at doing a redistricting to look at the overall every so
[8:44:34] many years within the agency, we do what's called a redistricting
[8:44:37] process, where we look at calls for service density and economic
[8:44:41] development and things that may have happened.
[8:44:42] for example, did a new did the wharf get built since the last
[8:44:46] time that we we did redistricting for a realignment
[8:44:49] of patrol districts within there to make sure that the resources
[8:44:53] are allocated appropriately? It's a very long process,
[8:44:57] usually a year plus process to do all that, to make sure that
[8:45:00] we're ready to go on january 1st of the prior year.
[8:45:05] so that's a conversation that has come up with something to
[8:45:07] look forward to at this point in this year.
[8:45:08] it's probably too late to have it in play for next year, but
[8:45:12] again, moving forward so we can have that for january 1st.
[8:45:15] the following year to have everything in play, because
[8:45:17] there's things that have to happen as far as reallocation of
[8:45:20] the ms., the master address repository, the ouc dispatching
[8:45:24] and how they do it and where the locations.
[8:45:26] so there's a lot that goes into it after the analysis is done.
[8:45:29] okay. According to figures between
[8:45:34] january 2018 and january of this year, mpd lost 658 officers, or
[8:45:40] 18% of the force. What is particularly notable is
[8:45:45] that the amount of officers on the streets or on patrol, or
[8:45:49] responding to 911 calls has been reduced by 32% over the same
[8:45:54] period. That means that almost a third
[8:45:55] of all officers and police service areas have been
[8:45:59] reassigned to headquarters or administrative work.
[8:46:02] is that that doesn't sound accurate?
[8:46:03] that does not sound that doesn't sound accurate.
[8:46:05] we we have less administrative people now probably than we've
[8:46:08] ever had. We've also worked to
[8:46:11] civilianized certain areas. So we're not heavy on on that
[8:46:13] aspect. As far as patrol officers and
[8:46:16] personnel. So I'd like to dig into that a
[8:46:17] little bit more. Okay.
[8:46:24] are you able to follow up? Yeah, we'll follow up in a week.
[8:46:27] yeah. On that as well.
[8:46:28] I think that sounds reasonable. If we have any issues.
[8:46:31] and the question there is, if you can speak to the decline in
[8:46:35] the force and the coverage of street patrolling versus
[8:46:41] administrative coverage. Yes, sir.
[8:46:49] my colleague, councilmember henderson, touched on the
[8:46:53] overtime requirements. But let me just generally ask,
[8:46:56] is there a ceiling or what is the guidance around overtime?
[8:47:00] I totally get why you're paying officers overtime, but is there
[8:47:04] any guidance or parameters that inform how much officer can make
[8:47:10] overtime? Not necessarily how much an
[8:47:12] officer can make, but over time, it's not like an open thing,
[8:47:14] like, hey, I want to work overtime, so I do.
[8:47:16] so there's specific initiatives and reasons why officers work
[8:47:20] overtime. You know, a lot of overtime that
[8:47:22] we have are related to special events.
[8:47:24] may they be the rock and roll marathon kind of thing, or
[8:47:27] federal special events that are out there.
[8:47:29] think of things like potus movements and things like that,
[8:47:32] where traffic posts have to be staffed.
[8:47:33] so you have those things. Any sort of overtime, the
[8:47:37] officers have to there's there's a need that's developed through
[8:47:39] in those cases, usually the special operations division of
[8:47:41] whatever that operational plan looks like.
[8:47:43] and then it's put out to to the force for them to staff those
[8:47:47] overtime spots that are out there.
[8:47:48] there's other overtime like patrol districts are short for a
[8:47:51] variety of reasons. Maybe it's the fact that, you
[8:47:54] know, there's eight people that are out on sick leave and
[8:47:57] there's people that were already approved for annual leave.
[8:47:59] so staffing on a shift is down a few people.
[8:48:02] so then they would need to use overtime to to fill those open
[8:48:05] shifts, because individuals that are on sick leave or things like
[8:48:07] that, if the numbers are below the staffing spikes in crime, if
[8:48:11] we have a spike, if we have a rash of burglaries in the area,
[8:48:14] we may develop an operational plan to address those burglaries
[8:48:17] in the area, using overtime personnel to be able to focus on
[8:48:20] that while we still maintain operations across the city.
[8:48:23] in those cases, there have been operational plan that's
[8:48:26] developed within the patrol operations side.
[8:48:28] it would be approved for a specific time frame to address
[8:48:31] that issue. And then once that issue goes
[8:48:33] away again, continually reevaluating how we're using the
[8:48:36] resources and what the plan is with that.
[8:48:39] so there's a few different ways that that happens as far as
[8:48:43] overtime with that. It's not just you can come in
[8:48:44] and work overtime. And do you have the figure of
[8:48:47] where we are as of today? In overtime?
[8:48:50] I do. Miss campbell can give it to you
[8:48:53] again. Are we referring to the overtime
[8:48:57] for fiscal 26? Yes, yes.
[8:49:00] for fiscal year 26. Our local overtime is $26.8
[8:49:06] million. How much?
[8:49:09] just making sure. I heard that was 26.8 million.
[8:49:12] 26.8. And what was the total for
[8:49:14] fiscal year? 25 mogle overtime for fiscal
[8:49:18] year 25. What what I'm showing here is
[8:49:25] 76.7. That came through, right?
[8:49:28] that can't be right. 76.7 for the entire fiscal year
[8:49:33] for overtime. Okay.
[8:49:36] how are you differentiating local versus any other overtime.
[8:49:41] so anything that is non-local is funded through either epsf or
[8:49:46] reimbursed or. Sorry.
[8:49:50] so in other words, $26.8 million so far of our local dollars have
[8:49:56] gone to overtime. Yes, sir.
[8:49:58] what was the total amount for fiscal year 26 so far?
[8:50:04] of all funded? Yes, it is.
[8:50:10] sorry. Sorry.
[8:50:25] 41.6. And what about for the entire
[8:50:30] fiscal year? 25?
[8:50:35] 130 3.8? That sounds right.
[8:50:41] okay. What internal controls, if any,
[8:50:45] has mpd placed on overtime spending?
[8:50:49] yeah. So we have a biweekly overtime
[8:50:51] report that goes out to to judge where we're at.
[8:50:54] as I said, anytime overtime is used, there's an operational
[8:50:57] plan that's approved or deployed for that outside of things like
[8:51:00] like a staffing shortage, for example, I gave you the earlier.
[8:51:04] so there's not overtime that's just out there that commanders
[8:51:07] can just hey, we want to put people out there.
[8:51:09] there's got to be a need for a plan of how we're going to
[8:51:12] deploy those resources and how we're going to try to address
[8:51:14] the underlying issue. And then a reevaluation of that
[8:51:17] to see, you know, has the issue been addressed, resolved?
[8:51:21] is there a way we can minimize that so we can use less
[8:51:24] resources? You know, if it's a if it's a
[8:51:26] robbery pattern in a certain area and that we make an arrest
[8:51:28] in the pattern goes away, then obviously we wouldn't need that.
[8:51:31] so it's really looking at the effects of that and how we're
[8:51:34] how we're impacting crime or whatever the underlying issue
[8:51:37] is. If it's potus or special events,
[8:51:39] obviously that's built on whatever that event is, whatever
[8:51:41] the staffing is needed for that, including crowd control and
[8:51:44] traffic posts and all the other assets that may be associated
[8:51:47] with that tactical assets. Okay, I will leave it there for
[8:51:51] the sake of time, but obviously we're talking a lot as a
[8:51:55] district about financial pressures and the the state of
[8:52:00] our budget. And routinely agencies are
[8:52:03] overspending. Now I get why mpd is paying
[8:52:06] overtime and overspending, but it I would love to see more
[8:52:10] internal controls to in fact ensure that that is the last
[8:52:14] resort that we're looking to paying overtime and not better
[8:52:19] strategizing around coverage and or patrols or what have you.
[8:52:23] so I look forward to following up on that.
[8:52:24] but thank you for your testimony today.
[8:52:27] yes, sir. Thank you very much, counselor
[8:52:31] parker. Thanks for being here, chief.
[8:52:33] is any of the $90 million allocation that we receiving for
[8:52:37] emergency services from the federal government able to be
[8:52:40] spent on local overtime? No.
[8:52:43] so my understanding. And, patricia, you can jump in
[8:52:45] here is that's related to the ipsf funds.
[8:52:47] so the the federal federal side, which drives a lot of overtime
[8:52:53] to but because it drives so much overtime, is that not a
[8:52:57] permissible use. No.
[8:52:57] so we use it for overtime. We use the that that funding
[8:53:01] stream we do use for overtime. But there's got to be a federal
[8:53:03] nexus related to it. So things like potus overtime
[8:53:08] president moves, things like that or special events.
[8:53:11] july 4th or some of these events that are coming up, this, this,
[8:53:14] this summer's america, 250 events, things like that.
[8:53:18] those can be charged back to those types of sources.
[8:53:21] so maybe asked a different way, is all of the $90 million being
[8:53:25] spent to cover federally connected overtime?
[8:53:29] I don't know if I don't I don't think all 90 of it's coming just
[8:53:32] to mpd. So I can't speak to what it's
[8:53:36] all being used for. I'm sure a portion will be to
[8:53:39] help out with the events associated with the summer, but
[8:53:41] I don't know is all the money that mpd is receiving from that
[8:53:46] fund going towards overtime coverage?
[8:53:50] yeah, it is. So we determine what is eligible
[8:53:54] for ipsf reimbursement, and that is submitted through the office
[8:53:57] of the chief financial officer. And then they transfer that to
[8:54:01] ep0. But of what you get for mpd is
[8:54:04] that all from overtime. Receive it.
[8:54:06] we get reimbursed for it. Okay.
[8:54:08] all of your reimbursement through ipsf.
[8:54:10] yes. Yeah.
[8:54:11] it's for overtime, not no. Sometimes we have some
[8:54:18] non-personnel costs very minimal that also get reimbursed if
[8:54:21] there's a federal nexus. Yes.
[8:54:23] like the vans ct for example, we have large activations.
[8:54:26] we may have to get additional vans or something like that.
[8:54:29] that would be for that special event.
[8:54:31] state of the union. Full activation vans.
[8:54:34] that could also because there's a federal nexus to that.
[8:54:36] like last night okay, okay. So returning to the task force,
[8:54:42] we have federal agents who are here who are not trained by mpd,
[8:54:48] who are not familiar with our laws, our customs, our
[8:54:53] community, how we operate. Has mpd trained any of these
[8:54:59] agents on mpd best practices? We have not changed them on our
[8:55:04] best practices. No, we haven't.
[8:55:07] is that something that you think we should start doing?
[8:55:10] there's been conversations within the task force to start
[8:55:13] joint training between the agencies to in areas of focus or
[8:55:16] areas of that. So that's definitely an area we
[8:55:18] can look at. It's something that they
[8:55:19] started, I think about a couple weeks ago to try to look at some
[8:55:23] joint training. So that may be an area we can
[8:55:24] leverage, especially some of the cons, to reinforce some of the
[8:55:27] community concerns that we've already had related to their
[8:55:30] deployment. So yeah, it's definitely an area
[8:55:32] we can look at. Okay.
[8:55:34] and I know it's always hard to to prove what could have
[8:55:38] happened in a different scenario, but with the philip
[8:55:42] brown case, I would posit that if that had been an mpd officer,
[8:55:49] perhaps they wouldn't have fired their gun because your training
[8:55:54] is different than the training, right?
[8:55:57] I'm not. I would imagine our training is
[8:56:00] definitely different. Level of repetition is
[8:56:03] definitely different. Our officers are trained to be
[8:56:05] police officers on the street, but they also go out and take
[8:56:07] hundreds and hundreds of calls a year every officer.
[8:56:10] so again, the there's there's one level which you learn
[8:56:12] through training. There's actual like field
[8:56:14] training that we do on the street.
[8:56:15] when you get to the academy, you ride with another mpd officer.
[8:56:18] so again, you reinforce and learn the nuances of what you
[8:56:21] were taught in the academy. And then just from responding
[8:56:24] from calls, I mean, you're always, you know, just like how
[8:56:25] laws are always changing. You're always trying to improve
[8:56:27] your training. But yeah, I mean, as you go to
[8:56:29] calls, you learn things too. So experience helps as well.
[8:56:32] okay. So in the case of philip brown
[8:56:36] where mpd was on the scene with agents and an agent shot into
[8:56:42] his car, and luckily he was not killed, but the the bullet went
[8:56:48] right through his jacket. There was an mpd investigation.
[8:56:53] you referred that case to the u.s. Attorney's office.
[8:56:56] they declined to prosecute the case.
[8:56:58] why was that body worn camera footage not released to the
[8:57:01] public? Sure.
[8:57:02] so it's like we spoke about. It's like we spoke about
[8:57:04] earlier. So the way the d.c. Code is
[8:57:06] written is relates to relates to the bwc is it has to be an mpd
[8:57:10] member using the serious use of force.
[8:57:12] there was no mpd member using serious use of force.
[8:57:15] therefore, for us to release it would not be in compliance with
[8:57:18] the law. Okay, so as you know, yesterday
[8:57:21] I introduced a bill that would clarify that if mpd officers are
[8:57:27] on a scene and have body worn camera footage and they're with
[8:57:31] a federal agent who uses a serious use of force, then that
[8:57:35] release would have to be made public within five days.
[8:57:39] I am familiar with that. There is another way right now
[8:57:41] under the law, that if there is a great public interest, the the
[8:57:44] mayor, the executive has the ability to release bwc as well.
[8:57:48] so that is another method that could be used if there was a
[8:57:51] great public interest. And I know there's the law,
[8:57:54] there's some collaboration between the mayor, the u.s.
[8:57:56] attorney, the oag, the investigating agencies that are
[8:57:59] related with that. But but there is another way
[8:58:01] that it could be. But based in this case, there
[8:58:03] wasn't a determination of a great public interest.
[8:58:06] but I am familiar. I did hear that there was some
[8:58:09] you introduced some some legislation.
[8:58:11] well, I think this case is an example of why that is so
[8:58:15] concerning, because I would say there is a great public interest
[8:58:19] in reviewing that footage. A serious public interest, and
[8:58:24] it hasn't been released. And so.
[8:58:28] to just say, well, she could if she needed to, it doesn't really
[8:58:32] apply. I was just giving you the two
[8:58:34] options. Yeah.
[8:58:35] I wasn't making a judgment. Yeah.
[8:58:39] okay. I mean, you talked about some of
[8:58:43] the limitations that we have with federal agencies.
[8:58:45] do you think that exposure to that bwc, in the event of a
[8:58:50] serious use of force, would improve public transparency and
[8:58:52] trust with mpd? I mean, I think the the easy
[8:58:57] answer is yes, but I think the real answer is it depends on
[8:58:59] what it shows and what's out there.
[8:59:01] the police reports released out there is another piece of
[8:59:04] evidence that's out there. In this case.
[8:59:06] I haven't seen that bwc, so I don't know what it looks like.
[8:59:09] I know some people have seen it. I personally haven't, but again,
[8:59:12] I know there are some folks that that would like to have that
[8:59:15] that's not what's currently in the law.
[8:59:17] and that's why we didn't release it.
[8:59:21] okay. You spoke earlier with me about
[8:59:28] and I don't want to put words in your mouth, but the message I
[8:59:31] received you saying was, it's actually better for d.c. To be
[8:59:35] working with these federal agents so that they're not kind
[8:59:38] of roaming the streets without without mpd.
[8:59:41] they're kind of advising on deployment and other things.
[8:59:44] so do you have cooperative agreements with all of these
[8:59:48] agencies? No.
[8:59:49] so, so I, I think it's better that we're there in trying to
[8:59:53] guide them to the areas that we need.
[8:59:54] obviously, we can't make them or control them, but I do think our
[8:59:59] input and our our information to try to, to, to, to mold that, I
[9:00:02] think is important. There are not cooperative
[9:00:04] agreements with these federal agencies.
[9:00:06] we do have cooperative agreements with with agencies in
[9:00:09] most cases. Those are small agencies that
[9:00:11] have a limited jurisdiction. So what those are is by engaging
[9:00:15] in a cooperative agreement, it gives them the authority to
[9:00:17] usually it's expanding to a larger area outside their
[9:00:19] building. So I think something like like
[9:00:21] the police and they want to be able to patrol outside of their
[9:00:24] confines of their property. The sidewalks and roadways
[9:00:27] around that. That's what almost all of their
[9:00:29] cooperative agreements are. The other agencies don't need
[9:00:33] mpd authority to do what they do.
[9:00:35] they have their own authority to do that.
[9:00:37] so they don't need usually an example like for example, the
[9:00:40] police, they need us to provide them that authority to be able
[9:00:43] to do that. They don't have that within
[9:00:45] themselves. The other agencies have their
[9:00:46] own authorities under federal law.
[9:00:48] some under d.c. Law, like the park police, to allow them to do
[9:00:51] what they do without a cooperative agreement.
[9:00:54] do you think it would be better to have a cooperative agreement
[9:00:57] with all these agencies who are on the task force?
[9:01:00] I don't think it would be helpful to us because there's no
[9:01:03] there's no benefit to them to engage in a cooperative
[9:01:05] agreement. They don't need the authorities.
[9:01:07] most people that we have them with like they they are looking
[9:01:10] for that because they need those authorities.
[9:01:12] they don't need these authorities.
[9:01:14] so it doesn't really benefit them to to come to us to engage
[9:01:17] with that. But I mean, would it benefit us?
[9:01:20] I don't I don't know if it would benefit us.
[9:01:22] I think and I'm sure you're probably trying to think under
[9:01:23] the lens of our ability to control them under the
[9:01:26] cooperative. The cooperative agreement, or
[9:01:28] try to to kind of mold what what they're doing.
[9:01:32] I don't know if it would actually really do that, or they
[9:01:35] would engage in something that would limited the authorities.
[9:01:37] they have under federal law already.
[9:01:40] so I don't know how realistic it is.
[9:01:42] it might be a better way to put it.
[9:01:44] I get the concept and I get the idea of trying to help to get
[9:01:47] them underneath the kind of doing the same kinds of things
[9:01:49] that we're doing the way that we do.
[9:01:50] I get the idea. I don't think that it would be
[9:01:52] beneficial to them to try to do that, because they don't need
[9:01:55] that. And if anything, it could be
[9:01:57] seen as limiting the authorities.
[9:01:58] they have. That's just my opinion.
[9:02:01] okay. So I need to ask you about this
[9:02:05] washington post story from today where the man, argueta, alleges
[9:02:12] that mpd called him and said that they found his stolen car.
[9:02:16] and then when he got to the district station, ice was there
[9:02:22] and said that they had found out his immigration status.
[9:02:25] sure. So again, I haven't read the
[9:02:27] article. I did hear about it.
[9:02:28] I think several council members have mentioned it.
[9:02:31] there could be a lot of reasons. Again, anything that I try to
[9:02:34] explain or say why it could be would be conjecture, and we have
[9:02:36] to investigate it and to look into it.
[9:02:38] was it an np member that called them like all those things?
[9:02:41] obviously it's it's out there. It's an allegation.
[9:02:42] I don't know if there's a lawsuit associated or if it's
[9:02:45] just a news story, but we'll have to look into it to see
[9:02:48] exactly what happened. Those facts, as I just presented
[9:02:52] them. Does that sound like something
[9:02:55] that could have happened with mpd?
[9:02:57] like what? It doesn't sound like something
[9:02:59] that we would do. No.
[9:03:00] is it outside the realm of possibility?
[9:03:02] I mean, things can happen. Would it be a violation of our
[9:03:06] policy? Kind of on the surface, what it
[9:03:07] sounds like. Yeah, it sounds like it would
[9:03:08] be. But again, was it a mpd officer?
[9:03:10] was it a voice on the phone? There's a lot of nuances that an
[9:03:14] investigation will have to dig into to determine, like what it
[9:03:16] really was. Was it whenever the initial
[9:03:19] incident happened, there were other agencies there, so they
[9:03:21] knew about it. And then they decided to call
[9:03:23] and have this person come in under a ruse.
[9:03:25] there's lots of things that are there.
[9:03:26] but again, all that's just conjecture.
[9:03:28] I don't have the specifics. I don't want to try to tinge it
[9:03:31] one way or the other. Okay.
[9:03:33] but if that was an mpd officer, based on what it sounds like in
[9:03:36] that in that case, would that be a violation of mpd?
[9:03:40] again, it sounds like it would be, but it's something we'd have
[9:03:42] to investigate and to ferret out.
[9:03:44] we have anytime there's an allegation of misconduct, we
[9:03:46] have to investigate it to get all the angles and look at it
[9:03:49] and make a determination with the available evidence.
[9:03:51] is there an active investigation?
[9:03:53] literally, I heard about the story.
[9:03:54] I think it came out while we were in here or just before we
[9:03:56] came in here. So it's something we'll have to
[9:03:58] look into. It sounds like maybe there's two
[9:04:00] incidences. So it's something that our
[9:04:01] internal affairs folks will have to look into.
[9:04:03] okay. I would appreciate that if we
[9:04:06] could look and we could follow, we'll follow back up with you,
[9:04:08] get some more information, because I imagine and again, I
[9:04:11] don't know this, but that by the time it got to a news story,
[9:04:15] there may have already been a complaint made would be my
[9:04:20] guess. There could be.
[9:04:22] there could be. Again, there's a lot of
[9:04:25] conjecture. There could be a lawsuit, there
[9:04:26] could be a complaint, there could be a lot of things.
[9:04:30] sometimes people go to the news and report things, and maybe
[9:04:32] they haven't filed a complaint yet too.
[9:04:34] so it depends. Okay.
[9:04:35] well, I appreciate you looking into that.
[9:04:39] now I want to ask you about mr. Bailey's shooting.
[9:04:44] so I heard you speak earlier about the hcy canvas on site.
[9:04:49] can you just walk me through again exactly what happened.
[9:04:53] who was called, and when mpd arrived to the scene, then why
[9:04:58] were u.s. Marshals involved in that incident at all?
[9:05:01] yes, I think I think we're referring to the incident that
[9:05:03] happened at the convenience store case.
[9:05:06] I wasn't involved in that. February 11th us marshals.
[9:05:09] yeah, park police and the marshals were were involved.
[9:05:11] at my understanding. Again, this is under
[9:05:13] investigation. So the actual officer involved
[9:05:15] shooting pieces. You know, we'll have to kind of
[9:05:16] be part of that in the parking lot.
[9:05:19] the information we have initially is the call came out
[9:05:21] for an individual armed with a gun.
[9:05:23] mpd officers were dispatched. They responded to that location
[9:05:26] where they then talked to the complainant who who filed the
[9:05:30] report at some point while they were on scene, individuals from
[9:05:33] park police, the marshal showed up.
[9:05:35] there was some sort of dialog and then they left.
[9:05:37] but hold on, just pause. At some point they showed up.
[9:05:40] yes. Why did that happen?
[9:05:42] well, they came on their own as my understanding.
[9:05:44] so park police have access to mpd radio channels.
[9:05:46] they have for many, many years. It's nothing new or related to
[9:05:49] the task force so they can hear calls for service.
[9:05:52] what about the us marshals? I don't think they have access
[9:05:55] to district radio zones. There are mutual aid channels
[9:05:58] that they that they share with us.
[9:05:59] right. But I don't think they have
[9:06:01] access to our district radio zones that are out there.
[9:06:04] how would they have known to show up there with the park
[9:06:07] police? They were physically they were
[9:06:08] together. They weren't in the same car,
[9:06:09] but they were together. They were working together.
[9:06:11] I don't know if they were on a team together or what that looks
[9:06:14] like, but they were together. So do you think?
[9:06:17] and I know you're investigating this, but do you think that the
[9:06:20] park police heard over the radio that mpd was called, and then
[9:06:23] the park police called the us marshal and said, we need backup
[9:06:27] for a call. We weren't even called to know.
[9:06:29] and this is all an assumption. I have no factual basis.
[9:06:32] this my assumption is the marshals and the park police
[9:06:34] were already together. They heard the call for a man
[9:06:36] with a gun in the area and they went to it.
[9:06:38] that would be my assumption. And is that common?
[9:06:43] it is. I mean, it is for law
[9:06:45] enforcement agencies that if they hear a call for an armed
[9:06:48] individual, a shooting, something serious, if they were
[9:06:49] in the area, it wouldn't be unusual for them to come in
[9:06:54] typical normal two years ago with the marshals, be with the
[9:06:57] park police. Usually not.
[9:06:59] but in this case they were the us marshals trained in policing.
[9:07:07] I'm I'm not specifically I don't know what they're trained in.
[9:07:10] I know they're trained law enforcement officers.
[9:07:12] I know that they generally do investigations and apprehend
[9:07:16] fugitives is one of the many things they also do.
[9:07:18] you know, there's a variety of functions they have as far as
[9:07:23] federal courthouses and federal prisons and things like that.
[9:07:25] I know that they are, of course, lead the the fugitive task force
[9:07:29] that that handles serious cases that are here.
[9:07:31] but again, what their specific training is, I can't say on the
[9:07:35] fugitive task force side, the cases that they're handling,
[9:07:38] though, on the back end in investigations, not engaging
[9:07:42] with an individual who so usually they're they're looking
[9:07:46] for an individual that has a warrant out for their arrest.
[9:07:48] so a person who may have committed usually it's serious
[9:07:51] cases, murders, serious individuals that may be very
[9:07:54] dangerous, things like that. And do they in those cases do
[9:07:57] they usually call mpd to come with them for those cases?
[9:08:00] no. So mpd park police, it's a it's
[9:08:03] a fugitive task force. So all these area agencies, pg
[9:08:07] county, they're all already on the task force together as they
[9:08:09] go out. Right?
[9:08:11] I guess what I'm trying to get at is in that, in that example
[9:08:14] that you're talking about, the fugitive task force, and there's
[9:08:17] a warrant out for someone's arrest, would it be common that
[9:08:20] the us marshals would call mpd to come with them to make the
[9:08:24] arrest? We'd already be there from from
[9:08:26] the beginning when they're going to look for the person, they
[9:08:29] work as a standing task force that report together, not just
[9:08:33] mpd, park police. All the agencies work as a
[9:08:35] standing task force because the warrants are ones that are held
[9:08:38] by mpd, held by the marshals, held by a variety of agencies,
[9:08:42] but isn't part of the benefit of you being there because you are
[9:08:45] trained in how to make an arrest, how to deescalate?
[9:08:48] we have our body worn cameras on us to ensure that that is
[9:08:54] carried out in a safe and just manner.
[9:08:56] yeah, I mean, I would say that that's part of it.
[9:08:58] and the same thing, I mean, the marshals portion of the
[9:09:00] marshals. And again, I don't know what
[9:09:02] this looks like, had body worn cameras in many of the other
[9:09:04] agencies that are on the task force to do as well.
[9:09:07] again, you know how a pg county officer is trained versus mpd
[9:09:11] officer or park police officer. They're a little different.
[9:09:13] there's similarities that are in there, but the nuances are
[9:09:16] different, right? Just like with we were going
[9:09:18] into pg county or virginia or somewhere like that, right.
[9:09:21] the home agency officers know that area.
[9:09:24] you know, they have the information to be more helpful
[9:09:27] than officers from other like us, from another jurisdiction.
[9:09:31] so your officers stayed on scene at the convenience store.
[9:09:34] so, yeah, again, my understanding is initially they
[9:09:37] got the call, they got the information, they go there, they
[9:09:40] make contact with the individual that called.
[9:09:42] at some point the marshals and park police come by there.
[9:09:44] they leave shortly thereafter. Our officers leave and they hear
[9:09:49] gunshots. And then shortly after the
[9:09:50] shooting, they arrive on the scene where the marshals and the
[9:09:53] park police are at. And what did the marshals say to
[9:09:55] you? I don't have that information.
[9:09:57] that's that's the part that's part of the officer involved
[9:09:59] shooting, which obviously still is under investigation and part
[9:10:02] of a criminal investigation. So those details are part of
[9:10:05] that. We can't I can't talk about it
[9:10:07] publicly. And frankly, in a normal
[9:10:09] scenario, I'm a big truster in the process that there would be
[9:10:12] an investigation and then there would be a prosecution if
[9:10:15] someone violated the law. But we just saw in the case from
[9:10:20] a couple of months ago where you all conducted your
[9:10:23] investigation, referred the case to the u.s. Attorney's office,
[9:10:25] and they declined to prosecute. And so I don't have the level of
[9:10:30] trust that I normally would that this federal government is
[9:10:35] actually going to investigate and pursue charges.
[9:10:37] if somebody did violate the law or did shoot a man without
[9:10:44] justification. So from mpd's perspective, how
[9:10:48] do we ensure the community's safety if we have agents who are
[9:10:53] not trained in our laws, who are not wearing body worn cameras,
[9:10:57] and we don't have insight into the status of the investigation?
[9:11:00] yeah. I mean, from perspective, that's
[9:11:02] why as much as we can do to try to work and collaborate with
[9:11:05] them, I think it's better for the community because things
[9:11:07] like this can happen again. They were with park police.
[9:11:10] park police is in the city. I mean, they police the city all
[9:11:13] the time. But I think that goes back to
[9:11:15] the benefit of us trying to work together with them versus, you
[9:11:18] know, just want to be a separation.
[9:11:20] but again, at the end of the day, they're independent law
[9:11:22] enforcement officers. They have their own training,
[9:11:24] they have their own authorities that we can't control with that.
[9:11:27] so it's a it's a situation that we're in.
[9:11:30] it's a situation that always was there before.
[9:11:32] this isn't new for the marshals or for park police, but it's a
[9:11:35] situation that now it comes to the forefront of everyone's
[9:11:37] minds as this task force is in operation.
[9:11:41] okay, I'm over time, so I'm going to move on.
[9:11:42] but I think this example and this tragedy really speaks to
[9:11:48] the gaps here, because on one hand, if you're saying we have
[9:11:52] this benefit, if we're coordinating in this case, we
[9:11:54] didn't even have mpd officers on site.
[9:11:56] so it kind of feels like on some areas there's a benefit, but
[9:12:01] then if it's not actually happening with the deployment,
[9:12:04] it's hard to see. But I'm going to turn to my
[9:12:07] colleague, ward 3 colleague, councilmember matt frumin, for a
[9:12:09] 15 minute round. Thank you very much,
[9:12:12] chairperson. Yes, sir.
[9:12:13] nice to see you. Well, I'm going to I'm going to
[9:12:16] stay on this just for a second because on the philip brown
[9:12:21] case, when there's a referral, that means the mpd internal
[9:12:26] investigation determined that there was a basis for a criminal
[9:12:29] prosecution, and therefore it's referred to.
[9:12:31] is that right? No.
[9:12:33] so any officer involved shooting, regardless of what it
[9:12:35] is, it's always referred to us attorney to make the final
[9:12:38] determination. Is there a what is what do you
[9:12:42] send to the us attorney's offices at a recommendation?
[9:12:45] does it include a recommendation?
[9:12:47] no. So it's a full outline of all
[9:12:48] the information that's been discovered.
[9:12:50] may there be video evidence, statements that are provided by
[9:12:54] the officers, statements that are provided by witnesses, the
[9:12:56] same thing that we would have in in any other criminal situation
[9:13:00] we present to them. They have a public corruption
[9:13:02] section of the us attorney's office that then reviews that,
[9:13:04] and then they make a determination.
[9:13:06] do they want to move forward with prosecution or do they not
[9:13:09] want to move forward with prosecution?
[9:13:11] so whenever you do this, it doesn't involve a
[9:13:14] recommendation. It just involves a report of
[9:13:17] what you determined were the facts.
[9:13:19] that's correct. We present them with the facts
[9:13:21] and then they make a determination.
[9:13:23] they evaluate the information that's there.
[9:13:24] so then there was a conversation about the body worn camera
[9:13:28] footage. But what about that report?
[9:13:30] are those reports made public our our body worn cameras.
[9:13:35] know your report to the to the us attorney upon which they make
[9:13:40] a determination to decline or pursue prosecution.
[9:13:42] no, that's that's a criminal investigation.
[9:13:44] so of course that's not a public investigation.
[9:13:46] just like any other criminal. Criminal investigation is out
[9:13:49] there. Any video that's in there, we
[9:13:51] would be the same as any other criminal investigation, a
[9:13:54] homicide or anything else that's presented.
[9:13:57] so how how does the I mean, this is an event that is of deep
[9:14:04] concern to people in the community, to folks in the
[9:14:08] community. They don't have the opportunity
[9:14:09] to see the report that you provided to the us attorney.
[9:14:14] they don't have the opportunity to see the footage that might
[9:14:17] have been included in that report.
[9:14:20] all we know is a report was done.
[9:14:22] we don't know what the it wouldn't have had a
[9:14:25] recommendation, but it would have had a description of the
[9:14:27] facts. And the us attorney's
[9:14:29] determination not to pursue a prosecution.
[9:14:31] and the police report that was taken.
[9:14:33] if we in general, in these cases, we take a police report
[9:14:35] of whatever the initial thing is.
[9:14:38] sometimes another agency may take that initial police report.
[9:14:42] and is that document public? I mean, if there's if there's a
[9:14:45] police report that's taken for like a discharge of a service
[9:14:48] pistol or things like that, that mpd takes, it is a public
[9:14:50] report. Yes.
[9:14:51] so many times, I don't know, in this case, if I can't tell you
[9:14:55] right now, off the top of my head, if we took the report or
[9:14:57] not, because the investigation is still there, we can follow up
[9:14:59] and let you know. I don't know if we took the
[9:15:01] report or if the marshals took a report, or if park police took a
[9:15:04] report, because we got to this scene afterwards.
[9:15:06] it wasn't like we were there when it happened.
[9:15:09] internal affairs did respond out and they are investigating that
[9:15:11] aspect of it. I mean, you can I think you do
[9:15:16] appreciate the frustration in the community about this
[9:15:20] terrible thing happened. There's precious little
[9:15:24] information that's available that there's information that is
[9:15:27] out there, but there's precious little information that's
[9:15:30] available. There is not, shall we say, not
[9:15:34] a high degree of confidence in the u.s. Attorney's office,
[9:15:38] willingness to pursue any kind of case like this.
[9:15:41] and so we feel naked to the wind.
[9:15:44] and so how do we get out of that?
[9:15:46] no, I understand that. And so everyone looks to mpd to
[9:15:49] try to provide that information. But again, we have to be bound
[9:15:52] by the law and what we can provide.
[9:15:53] I understand mpd has high expectations of the community,
[9:15:58] 100% understand that, but they are their own agency.
[9:16:01] they have their own internal processes.
[9:16:02] once the criminal aspect is done, either they'll be a
[9:16:05] criminal prosecution which will go through the regular public
[9:16:08] process, or if a declination is determined, then there'll be
[9:16:11] whatever administrative process, however they do that within that
[9:16:14] agency. That's not something that mpd
[9:16:16] can control or has control of. I hear you, and we're all in an
[9:16:22] incredibly difficult situation, and part of what you're saying
[9:16:25] is, in some ways, it's better if mpd is approximate, because mpd
[9:16:31] can maybe play some kind of role to try to influence.
[9:16:34] yes. And in some ways, the
[9:16:37] convenience store story makes that point at the, the, the
[9:16:43] firearms are discharged when mpd is not there.
[9:16:45] and so and maybe this is the case in both situations that the
[9:16:49] firearm is discharged when mpd is not there.
[9:16:53] but we have these operations happening inside of our city,
[9:16:58] out of our control, out of your control, and with very limited
[9:17:06] information and transparency about it.
[9:17:08] so you can I don't envy. Absolutely.
[9:17:11] no, I do like I said, we don't we don't want to be in this
[9:17:13] position, in this position at all.
[9:17:15] it's a position that we find ourselves in.
[9:17:17] and it's very challenging because a lot of people are
[9:17:19] looking. I mean, in my opinion, we have a
[9:17:21] good relationship with the community.
[9:17:22] so people come to us for that information and the ability for
[9:17:25] us to be in a situation where we don't have it.
[9:17:27] it's not our agency, it's not our officers.
[9:17:29] we don't have that. It is challenging.
[9:17:30] I do understand the frustration, though, and I know I'm I'm late.
[9:17:35] there's a lot of different big things happening today and and
[9:17:39] I'm sure I'm treading territory that's already been tread.
[9:17:42] but on the immigration side, here's the way that I understand
[9:17:46] it, is that all federal law enforcement has been deputized
[9:17:50] to do immigration. And so the task force includes
[9:17:56] mpd and representatives of all federal law enforcement.
[9:18:01] mpd is not doing immigration enforcement.
[9:18:05] ice isn't part of the task force.
[9:18:07] so mpd is not working with ice. But all of the federal agencies
[9:18:12] have the capacity to do immigration enforcement.
[9:18:16] and then the question becomes, to what extent is mpd actively
[9:18:24] facilitating immigration enforcement?
[9:18:26] that's what worries d.c. Residents.
[9:18:28] and that's why this story about an mpd officer calling someone,
[9:18:34] it may not be an mpd officer, it could be somebody else who's
[9:18:37] doing it, but it it underscores to what extent is mpd an active
[9:18:44] facilitator of this, and to what extent is mpd trying to moderate
[9:18:49] it? And it puts everybody in a very
[9:18:54] challenging situation. But I wonder if you can speak to
[9:18:58] that. And including what kind the
[9:19:03] challenge comes up doubly again because of transparency.
[9:19:08] when you answer the question, how often does it happen?
[9:19:11] so so part of what's out there is it used to be that ice was
[9:19:15] operating on its own in the city and doing warrantless arrests,
[9:19:19] and that got stopped. And so that has not happening in
[9:19:22] the same way as it was happening in the fall.
[9:19:24] and I actually am not hearing about immigration enforcement as
[9:19:29] much today as I was a month or two ago.
[9:19:33] but we don't have any data. And are you in any way tracking
[9:19:40] with the crime suppression units?
[9:19:43] how often has it happened that one of the other federal
[9:19:48] partners arrested somebody, even if it's not in the database, are
[9:19:52] you tracking it in even an informal sort of way?
[9:19:55] no, we're not. And this has come up again in a
[9:19:57] kind of a variety of ways. And I understand there's a want
[9:20:00] for mpd to be able to provide what the federal government is
[9:20:03] doing, but we don't have that ability.
[9:20:05] and for our officers to try to go around and figure out what
[9:20:07] they're doing when they're doing it.
[9:20:10] I mean, it doesn't make much sense.
[9:20:12] I definitely understand the concerns.
[9:20:13] and you're absolutely right. We are in a precarious
[9:20:16] situation. Mpd is not trying to facilitate
[9:20:19] immigration enforcement. There is no benefit to mpd to
[9:20:21] facilitate immigration enforcement.
[9:20:23] all this conversation does even that story.
[9:20:25] if it turns out that the person that called was not mpd, that
[9:20:28] will not ever make the headlines.
[9:20:30] that will never be a big talking point.
[9:20:32] that will the the interpretation from many people will be,
[9:20:35] regardless if it's true or not, that mpd did that.
[9:20:37] and that's what hurts us. Right.
[9:20:39] and the fact to your point about the credibility.
[9:20:42] so I definitely understand that, you know, for us it's a big
[9:20:45] concern. We don't want to be in those
[9:20:47] situations, but it is a precarious situation because to
[9:20:50] your point, just about every federal agency could.
[9:20:52] and if we go out to make an arrest for whatever and a u.s.
[9:20:56] marshal decides to all of a sudden try to do some
[9:21:00] immigration enforcement, then we're there and it's going to
[9:21:02] look like we are, and things will be.
[9:21:04] mpd took them there for this. Like all these things will come
[9:21:06] up, and that's not the purpose of it.
[9:21:08] but again, it paints us in a bad light.
[9:21:12] I mean, do you are you thinking about ways to try to not be
[9:21:19] painted in such a bad light, to be able to provide information
[9:21:23] so that you can ameliorate some of the concerns?
[9:21:26] I mean, I, I don't think there's any easy solutions, and I know
[9:21:30] there's a want for like try to have mpd to figure out what the
[9:21:34] federal government is doing. I don't think that's the
[9:21:36] solution. I don't think having our
[9:21:38] officers don't know what they're doing.
[9:21:39] they don't know what they've done before the officers get
[9:21:41] there. It's the same conversation about
[9:21:43] our officers trying to determine what types of force they're
[9:21:46] doing and what they aren't doing.
[9:21:47] like we don't have that information.
[9:21:49] and do you really want to mpd officer trying to second guess
[9:21:51] what happened there? That just puts us even farther
[9:21:54] into that situation than it is. And looks like we're even more
[9:21:57] trying to facilitate or get into that.
[9:21:59] so like, I understand the want and I know if there is an easy
[9:22:02] solution, either mpd or the council or somebody else would,
[9:22:05] would have come up with that solution because it takes it
[9:22:08] away from a lot of us. Right.
[9:22:09] but I don't think that it's quite there yet, and I don't I
[9:22:15] don't have the solution for you today, but I guess I do want the
[9:22:20] council and mpd and the mayor to be partners in trying to find a
[9:22:26] path to a solution where these concerns, because I think it's
[9:22:30] going to it. You've said it, they're going to
[9:22:32] be gone and you're you're going to have to operate and
[9:22:38] rebuilding confidence in the community is going to be a giant
[9:22:43] project. That sort of has to be starting
[9:22:46] now, even as you're in this conundrum.
[9:22:49] so I, I'd encourage let's we should all be looking for what's
[9:22:54] the path. I am sensitive to the fact that
[9:22:59] hammers have come down and they were worse.
[9:23:02] and we don't want a hammer to come down.
[9:23:04] like I think you allude to this. Do you want these?
[9:23:08] do you want many more of these people on our streets, on their
[9:23:13] own? Is that a better outcome for the
[9:23:15] district? That's a legitimate question and
[9:23:18] a legitimate fear. But how we navigate through this
[9:23:23] process, that's the challenge. And we should be working
[9:23:27] together to try to find that solution.
[9:23:28] no, I agree with you 100%, sir. There was the reference to I'm
[9:23:36] going to move to what I think is more mundane.
[9:23:38] I think frankly, that's the giant challenge in front of the
[9:23:44] agency. And for you personally, here you
[9:23:46] are in this really difficult moment.
[9:23:49] and so that's the big question. But back to some of the overtime
[9:23:56] things. I guess when I think about those
[9:23:59] numbers, 26 million in overtime, that's that's overtime for local
[9:24:03] purposes. And then last year it was 76
[9:24:07] million for the whole year. We're we're a third of the way
[9:24:09] through the year. We're on the exact same track.
[9:24:11] we have not increased overtime nor have we decreased it.
[9:24:15] how could we decrease it? Well, I don't know if that's
[9:24:17] actually a fair comparison, because since last year there
[9:24:19] has been an increase in the collective bargaining.
[9:24:21] the officers get paid more now than they did last year.
[9:24:23] so that just to put that out there.
[9:24:25] so even though regardless if he worked the same amount of hours,
[9:24:28] we would still have a higher price versus this year.
[9:24:31] you know me, how I look at the lens is what are ways that we
[9:24:34] can cut down, especially now as things are, you know, calmer out
[9:24:39] there because there may come a time when we need to increase
[9:24:41] some of our initiatives that we have out there.
[9:24:44] some of our standing initiatives are thrive, which is our
[9:24:47] homicide reduction plan is out there.
[9:24:48] and those overtime is used to help give additional resources
[9:24:52] in those areas, because we know that those areas drive a
[9:24:56] majority or not majority. A large portion of violent
[9:24:59] crime. And by keeping crime down those
[9:25:01] areas, it has an impact in safety in the overall city.
[9:25:04] so there's initiatives that are initiatives that we have, like
[9:25:07] the thrive robbery suppression initiative, where we focus on
[9:25:10] areas where there's pattern robberies to deploy resources.
[9:25:13] again, back to plans and metrics and putting resources out there.
[9:25:17] but no, it's definitely an area that we're looking at of how can
[9:25:20] we work to cut down. With that being said, if crime
[9:25:23] spikes up or we need to deploy additional resources because
[9:25:25] we're seeing a trend, we're going to have to shift shift
[9:25:28] resources and use over time. I mean, for us, the challenge is
[9:25:31] we are down so many officers. It drives so much overtime, and
[9:25:35] overtime gets paid at a much higher rate than regular
[9:25:37] officer's salary. So and I thought I heard I have
[9:25:40] been listening in and out. Did you say we're down 638?
[9:25:44] how many officers? So we have 31 I think 44 or 47
[9:25:47] as of this week. And, you know, somewhere between
[9:25:52] 3800 and 4000 is where we should be.
[9:25:53] I think when I came on the police department, we were
[9:25:55] closer to 3900. You know, almost 24 years ago.
[9:25:58] with that being said. But I believe the amount of
[9:26:00] overtime that we use we looked at could be almost like 800
[9:26:03] officers. I think we somewhere in the
[9:26:05] response to the questions, we give an estimate of how many
[9:26:08] officers like that would be the difference of because back to I
[9:26:11] mean, we talk about root causes, the lack of officers brings in
[9:26:15] federal people trying to, quote unquote, help us, brings in
[9:26:18] driving up overtime, things like that.
[9:26:19] so a lot of these challenges also have a link back to our
[9:26:23] staffing challenge. And what's what's happening in
[9:26:27] terms of trends. Were we a year ago, were we if
[9:26:31] we're 3150 now a year ago, where we 3150 or were we a higher
[9:26:36] number? No, we were a higher number.
[9:26:37] we're a little less, I think, from this year versus last year.
[9:26:40] it's about a hundred, maybe a little, a little less than 100
[9:26:43] people. We have less this year than we
[9:26:44] have last year, last year where we had the least amount of
[9:26:48] retirements and resignations that we had, like in the past
[9:26:50] ten years. So on that aspect, we're seeing
[9:26:53] less people leaving. But as far as the actual number
[9:26:55] of people getting in the classes, we aren't seeing a huge
[9:26:58] uptick. And now with the task force,
[9:27:00] there's agencies that are part police is offering $70,000
[9:27:04] hiring bonus, are offering a 25% retention bonus.
[9:27:07] so not only are they getting a lot of officers, some from mpd
[9:27:10] are leaving to go to park police because of these things.
[9:27:13] they're also pulling in a lot of other folks who may be looking
[9:27:16] to come to this area to be law enforcement.
[9:27:18] when they see things like that, you know, they go there versus
[9:27:21] coming to mpd because policing at park police is is not
[9:27:25] anywhere near like policing mpd chairperson pinto, can I go for
[9:27:31] thank you very much. I mean, I had not thought about
[9:27:34] it that way in terms of the competition for resources and
[9:27:39] that's another incredibly corrosive impact.
[9:27:43] so we we are left more dependent because our numbers go down and
[9:27:50] they're able to pay much more. Very troubling.
[9:27:57] the and I'm sure this has been tried before, but there's there
[9:28:01] had been the controversy around the data on reporting crimes.
[9:28:04] and I wonder where things stand on that.
[9:28:08] and in that process, I had folks reach out and say, well, why
[9:28:14] doesn't mpd publicize data like chicago does?
[9:28:18] which is a very complete set of data.
[9:28:22] so how are you thinking about the controversy around crime
[9:28:27] statistics, and how are you thinking about changing the data
[9:28:32] that is made available, or are you thinking about changing the
[9:28:35] data that is made available to the public so that it tells an
[9:28:41] irrefutable story? No, no.
[9:28:42] so on that topic, obviously there were investigations that
[9:28:45] that came from both congressional inquiry, us
[9:28:49] attorney, the mayor asked the the office of the inspector
[9:28:53] general to look into the crime data.
[9:28:55] so that investigation continues there at that.
[9:28:58] so, you know, while we're waiting for some of those
[9:29:00] recommendations, we're not just sitting waiting for
[9:29:03] recommendations. There's some areas that have
[9:29:04] been quickly identified. Things like we've already pushed
[9:29:07] out training to our officers about classification crimes to
[9:29:10] make sure that they're to reinforce the classifications of
[9:29:13] crimes in the elements thereof. What does that mean?
[9:29:16] there are elements are certain requirements that make a a
[9:29:19] charge underneath d.c. Co code. Some can be very similar.
[9:29:22] so making sure that our officers have clarity, especially on some
[9:29:25] of those charges that are that are challenging, pushing out
[9:29:29] circulars on how we reconcile report numbers to make sure
[9:29:31] we're accounting for all that moving forward.
[9:29:34] we pull together a team within the agency to look at
[9:29:37] recommendations. Some of the things longer term,
[9:29:40] pushing forward outside of whatever recommendations we get
[9:29:42] from the inspector general and our our other investigations are
[9:29:46] instituting a staff review model or an independent group within
[9:29:49] the department that's not associated with patrol
[9:29:52] operations or any bureau that will not only review all the
[9:29:55] reports they'll review to make sure they're completed
[9:29:57] accurately, to make sure that the elements of the of the crime
[9:30:01] match the classification that's there.
[9:30:03] this is something that we had years ago.
[9:30:05] and then when we switched to a newer records management system,
[9:30:09] it was made much more automated so that that staff review
[9:30:13] portion, the manual portion was taken out for efficiency.
[9:30:15] but I think an unintended consequence was that as you
[9:30:18] didn't have the the human eyes looking at those elements.
[9:30:20] so having that that independent look at there to make sure that
[9:30:24] the reports are complete, that they're accurate, that it meets
[9:30:26] their if not, they can be flagged to be addressed with
[9:30:29] that. That's going to be key.
[9:30:31] just regardless of kind of where we get to the actual stats.
[9:30:35] now, when we talk about looking at crime stats and how we report
[9:30:38] stats, there was a shift from the fbi about how they report
[9:30:42] stats in 2021. They moved from the the ucr srs
[9:30:46] system, which is a system that was developed in the 1960s.
[9:30:49] I won't bore you with the details, but the methodology and
[9:30:51] kind of how that work is different than to the system,
[9:30:54] they call it nibrs that they now use to report data.
[9:30:58] when we migrated to that system, we are reporting data to the fbi
[9:31:03] under the nibrs category monthly as required.
[9:31:07] but we still continue to use dcr, the district's crime
[9:31:11] reporting index for crime deployment strategies.
[9:31:14] one of the things that I want to look at as we kind of look
[9:31:17] through and look at some of the recommendations that come out of
[9:31:18] this report, is, is there a way to leverage nibrs classifies all
[9:31:23] crime types that are out there and put them in there.
[9:31:24] there's, I believe, 50. There's two categories.
[9:31:27] I think it's a and b, but there's like 50 and one and ten
[9:31:30] the other, which gives a, I think, a more holistic view of
[9:31:34] what that looks like. So looking at how we can
[9:31:36] leverage that data. So we do have more information
[9:31:39] that's out there, I think that will put us more in line with
[9:31:42] the best practices that are is used in the nibrs methodology.
[9:31:46] so we're looking at like, what does that look like, what
[9:31:49] impacts will that have a challenge with.
[9:31:51] that is if we were to go to fully to nibrs comparison under
[9:31:55] the old crime systems would not really be there because it's a
[9:31:58] whole different methodology of how you do it.
[9:32:00] so you lose that benefit, right? That hindsight of data.
[9:32:04] so we're looking at like, what is the best, the best way to
[9:32:07] make sure that we're being transparent and we have the best
[9:32:09] data for deployment. We use this crime data for
[9:32:12] deployment of resources officers.
[9:32:14] we talked a little earlier about, you know, our district
[9:32:17] realignments and things like that.
[9:32:18] so the data is very important to how we deploy resources.
[9:32:21] so our team is together kind of looking at that and to push the
[9:32:24] best path forward. And then of course we'll take
[9:32:26] any recommendations that come out of these reports and marry
[9:32:29] that in there to the path. Okay, I'm way, way over.
[9:32:33] sorry. No no no, no.
[9:32:35] I'm very appreciative of the answer.
[9:32:37] I would tell you my gut is going to the more complete set of
[9:32:40] data, even if it undermined the ability to do backward looks for
[9:32:43] a period of time. I think it would be valuable.
[9:32:47] but just one person's not that informed view.
[9:32:52] so thank you for your testimony and thank you for your service.
[9:32:55] yes, sir. Thank you, councilmember frumin,
[9:32:58] I find you very informed. So okay.
[9:33:03] thank you for being here. Councilmember crawford, are you
[9:33:06] still on? Yes, but I don't have any other
[9:33:10] questions. Thanks.
[9:33:11] okay, great. Okay, so, chief, talk to me
[9:33:18] about where we are with violent crime, how the trends have been
[9:33:22] going. What has been working?
[9:33:24] you talked a little bit about in your pre-hearing responses, your
[9:33:27] change of methodology, of identifying hotspots and how
[9:33:31] you're tracking gun violence data.
[9:33:33] how has that worked in practice? What's been effective?
[9:33:36] yeah, I mean, I think overall hotspot policing, I mean, it's
[9:33:38] proven to be effective to drive down crime in some areas without
[9:33:42] having too much displacement of crime that's out there.
[9:33:45] so right now, as we sit today, violent crime is down 29%.
[9:33:48] I believe property crime is also down 29%.
[9:33:51] and overall crime is an area that we are starting to see a
[9:33:54] challenge in is as it relates to domestic violence.
[9:33:56] and I think some of the other folks that testified today
[9:34:00] mentioned domestic violence. We are starting to see an
[9:34:02] increase in domestic violence related assaults and crimes.
[9:34:06] so for us, you know, those are real challenges because it's a
[9:34:09] lot of times, a lot of times the violence is underreported, we
[9:34:12] know, but also the ability to connect and to get resources and
[9:34:15] to help people that are in those situations can be challenging.
[9:34:19] so again, you know, we partner with dc safe and other other
[9:34:21] agencies, but ways to really try to address that, to drive down
[9:34:25] those, those assaults as an area that we're continuing to look
[9:34:29] at. Overall, why do you think that
[9:34:33] domestic violence cases are not going down the same way?
[9:34:35] we're seeing across all other categories?
[9:34:38] well, it's a really good question.
[9:34:40] I don't have any complete answer to why that's happening.
[9:34:43] again, I think there's there's probably a few things going on
[9:34:45] there. I would say some could be
[9:34:47] weather related, especially with we have the cold and people
[9:34:49] being kind of more inside over that.
[9:34:51] but I don't think there's a there's a great, complete
[9:34:54] understanding of why that is, at least from my perspective.
[9:35:00] okay. Do you serve on the dv task
[9:35:04] force with ccdc? I do not serve on the dv task
[9:35:06] force. We do have an mpd representative
[9:35:08] that's serving on the on the task force.
[9:35:09] now, I believe it's captain hallahan is on there.
[9:35:14] okay, okay. Your pre-hearing responses in
[9:35:18] regard to my questions around case closure identified that
[9:35:22] violent crimes have a much higher case closure for 2025
[9:35:25] than we did in 24 2025. The closure rate for homicide
[9:35:29] was the highest it's been since 2011.
[9:35:33] dcs closure rate is better than comparably sized cities on
[9:35:36] almost all categories of violent crime, and I want to note that
[9:35:39] it's a huge accomplishment and level of progress.
[9:35:43] what do you attribute some of those main factors to having a
[9:35:47] higher closure rate, and can we learn some of those lessons to
[9:35:50] apply to the domestic violence space?
[9:35:52] I think the ability to have a higher closure rate, especially
[9:35:55] in the homicide area, a lot of that is the breathing room
[9:35:57] that's building. By having less homicides, it
[9:35:59] gives the detectives more time to focus on those cases and to
[9:36:04] move forward. You know, if there's multiple
[9:36:06] homicides in a night or there's multiple in a shorter time
[9:36:09] frame, those are more cases that have to continue to be
[9:36:11] investigated. So it takes away time for other
[9:36:13] cases that they're on. So I think that's one area where
[9:36:15] it really the reduction not only benefits, obviously the lives
[9:36:19] saved, but it also helps us to be able to move forward faster
[9:36:23] in those cases. And then I will say I will
[9:36:26] acknowledge the u.s. Attorney's office.
[9:36:28] they have really there was, you know, a lot of cases that were
[9:36:30] in review warrant applications with them.
[9:36:32] they really worked to drive those numbers down much lower
[9:36:35] than they have been in prior years.
[9:36:37] so again, that allows us to to date, these violent offenders
[9:36:40] that have killed people off the street.
[9:36:42] thank you. And yeah, I can see it
[9:36:46] continuing to kind of beget more progress because then as the
[9:36:49] case closure rate goes up, hopefully crime goes down even
[9:36:53] further. People knowing that there will
[9:36:54] be. Absolutely.
[9:36:55] and we know there's usually a small group of folks that are
[9:36:57] engaged in a majority of criminal activity.
[9:36:59] yeah. The case closure rate for
[9:37:02] robbery was the lowest in the violent crimes that you all
[9:37:06] listed. Can you speak to why you think
[9:37:08] that is? And what more we can do to
[9:37:10] ensure that robberies are investigated and that those
[9:37:13] cases are closed? Yeah.
[9:37:14] and so it's not there's not it's not I don't want there to be an
[9:37:17] appearance that's not we're not not that we're not investigating
[9:37:19] and we are. But that being said, a lot of
[9:37:22] times, especially robberies and the circumstances around them
[9:37:24] can be challenging. A lot of folks that conduct
[9:37:28] robberies, they they're they're target selection.
[9:37:29] they're victim selection. They may pick people that are in
[9:37:32] nightlife areas or areas where they've been in bars and
[9:37:34] restaurants. So their ability to identify
[9:37:37] individuals or crowded areas, it may be more challenging than for
[9:37:41] them to do identification as related to that, or even know
[9:37:43] what happened to them in some cases.
[9:37:45] so there are challenges that some things that help us, that
[9:37:48] are very helpful. A lot of times in the robbery
[9:37:51] cases is video. You know, we talk a lot about
[9:37:53] the things that we do and we haven't touched on it as much,
[9:37:55] especially in this hearing as we have in prior years.
[9:37:57] but the real time crime center and the camera connecting the
[9:38:00] ability for folks to get cameras and provide that information to
[9:38:03] us is very helpful. When we do have these robberies,
[9:38:06] it allows us to go back to investigate those and
[9:38:09] potentially identify suspects that are in those cases.
[9:38:12] so in that aspect of it. But a lot of times there is a
[9:38:15] lot of legwork that has to go in there.
[9:38:17] sometimes, especially in robbery situations, there may be a delay
[9:38:21] in reporting for a variety of reasons.
[9:38:23] maybe they're not from the area. Maybe they robbed them of a cell
[9:38:25] phone, so their ability to immediately call 911 and get
[9:38:28] officers there is delayed to some level.
[9:38:30] so there can be factors that are in there that also play into
[9:38:32] that. Okay.
[9:38:34] so speaking of technology and using data to drive down crime,
[9:38:39] we heard from a number of our public witnesses a serious
[9:38:42] concern about the use of flock cameras and other technology.
[9:38:46] and I want to ask you about your contract with flock safety.
[9:38:50] and in a letter, in response to councilmember henderson's
[9:38:53] questions, you stated that you, quote, asked mpd's policy and
[9:38:59] standards division to review the department's current policy to
[9:39:02] ensure it adequately addresses the capabilities of the new
[9:39:05] technology and that you would direct mpd's risk management
[9:39:08] division to begin to audit its use before assessing the program
[9:39:13] to determine how mpd would move forward with it.
[9:39:15] so can you provide an update on how those audits have gone, and
[9:39:19] if there have been any changes based on your review?
[9:39:22] sure. So let me provide a little
[9:39:23] context, because people may not be like, why all of a sudden
[9:39:26] now? So the flock cameras were used
[9:39:28] to replace legacy lprs that we had that were from a different
[9:39:33] vendor. So some of those lpr a license
[9:39:35] plate reader. So flock is a license plate
[9:39:37] reader is what they are. They they read license plates on
[9:39:40] vehicles. And there's legislation in the
[9:39:41] district about information and policy, about how long we can
[9:39:45] retain reads from from vehicles that are not associated with
[9:39:48] crime. So a 90 day time frame and then
[9:39:49] those reads are no longer kept. Right.
[9:39:52] but that being said, the flock system is a new system.
[9:39:55] so we got those along with motorola as another vendor
[9:40:00] that's out there to replace legacy or older systems of lpr
[9:40:04] to get out there. There's great value.
[9:40:06] in lpr. We talk about robberies and
[9:40:08] crimes and things like that. The ability to especially when
[9:40:11] there's vehicles involved to track vehicles that are in the
[9:40:14] area or see a vehicle that's fleeing from the area, and also
[9:40:17] immediately grab an image from that push out through a real
[9:40:19] time crime center to officers on the street has been very
[9:40:22] successful in helping to apprehend and locate individuals
[9:40:26] you know, that are engaged in criminal activity.
[9:40:28] so with this being said, you know, me being new to coming
[9:40:31] into the seat, our policy that we have as it relates to lpr was
[9:40:34] written when we had the older system, the from the older
[9:40:37] venue, our vendor that provided lpr.
[9:40:39] so since we now are using a variety of vendors and the old
[9:40:44] system was, you know, different, it didn't go to it wasn't cloud
[9:40:47] based. There's different considerations
[9:40:49] with that. So just making sure that for me
[9:40:51] being new, coming in the seat, doing a full review of our
[9:40:54] policy to make sure that whatever new technologies are
[9:40:57] built in this lpr that may be different than our old ones
[9:41:00] we've addressed in our policy addresses that.
[9:41:02] so we have the appropriate safeguards and civil liberties
[9:41:05] as it relates to that in there. There's not anything that hasn't
[9:41:07] changed or been missed since the policy was put out.
[9:41:10] and then having risk management, just look at look at the the
[9:41:13] logs to see making sure that we are doing routine audits of the
[9:41:17] lpr files. When you use lpr you have to log
[9:41:19] into it. So it's a unique individual
[9:41:22] identifier. We know who's running the tags.
[9:41:24] there's a space to indicate why you're doing it.
[9:41:26] maybe it relates to an investigation or something else.
[9:41:28] you can't just run lpr tags to run lpr reads.
[9:41:32] that's not what we do. And then as I said, there's no
[9:41:35] nexus. There's not a hit, a hit being
[9:41:37] maybe the tag is related to a stolen vehicle.
[9:41:40] officers go out to that area, they locate the vehicle and they
[9:41:44] make an arrest associated that. That would be what we call a
[9:41:46] hit. In that case, that data could be
[9:41:48] retained for prosecution later on.
[9:41:50] so just making sure that we do take, especially from me being
[9:41:53] new, coming to the seat, making sure we take a fresh look at
[9:41:55] this. We also have a new cio at the
[9:41:58] agency who's been on for about 2 or 3 months.
[9:42:00] so I think it's another good opportunity for us just to take
[9:42:02] a full review of our policies, procedures, just to make sure
[9:42:06] that we are following the best practices.
[9:42:08] so when you say it's helpful in apprehending suspects who are
[9:42:14] violating the law, how can district residents be sure that
[9:42:17] their private information is not being utilized or caught up in
[9:42:21] this system as they go about their daily lives?
[9:42:24] yeah, so the lpr system, it captures images of tags.
[9:42:27] it doesn't it doesn't do anything else other than that.
[9:42:30] and then it compares it against stolen vehicle files, hot files.
[9:42:35] and obviously it could you could check it through registration.
[9:42:37] so there's no cjis compliant, which is the fbi's criminal
[9:42:41] justice information system compliance.
[9:42:43] so the appropriate safeguards as identified by the fbi have to be
[9:42:46] in play to make sure individuals information is safeguarded
[9:42:50] appropriately. So again, as part of the review,
[9:42:51] I think it's just a good a good once over the contract actually
[9:42:55] references the safeguards in the data that we provided with a
[9:42:58] letter as well. But that seems to speak to
[9:43:02] safeguards once the data has already been collected.
[9:43:04] but how about what data itself is being collected at the front
[9:43:08] end? Lpr's collect license plate data
[9:43:10] from vehicles, so the tags that are on cars is what?
[9:43:13] so any vehicle in the district of columbia could be if it
[9:43:16] passes an lpr on public space. Yeah, they're on public space.
[9:43:18] so if it passes it. But again that data can't be
[9:43:21] retained more than 90 days. So after 90 days it has to be
[9:43:24] offloaded. It's not kept forever or for
[9:43:26] years or things like that. It's not allowed.
[9:43:28] and how long has mpd been using this technology?
[9:43:33] lpr that's a great, great question.
[9:43:34] I would probably venture to say shortly thereafter.
[9:43:39] 2001 2002 I can get you an exact time frame.
[9:43:41] we've been using it for for a very long time now.
[9:43:43] our other jurisdictions across the country using this most, I
[9:43:47] would venture to say, most jurisdictions across the country
[9:43:50] are using the lp's. Like I said, they're they're a
[9:43:53] great tool, especially after a crime occurs.
[9:43:55] so I would say there's probably very few jurisdictions that
[9:43:58] don't have some level of lpr usage.
[9:44:08] so when you said it's a good time to review the safeguards,
[9:44:12] when when will you have that review completed?
[9:44:14] I would imagine probably within the next month or two, fully.
[9:44:19] okay. And are the flock cameras
[9:44:21] integrated into the real time crime center?
[9:44:23] yes, they are. And then does flock safety have
[9:44:28] access to our real time crime center footage?
[9:44:30] no. My understanding is they do not
[9:44:32] have access to air video footage.
[9:44:34] we can. Only the data is our data to
[9:44:37] have. So we can only share with other
[9:44:39] agencies if we so choose to do so.
[9:44:42] but mpd can share with other agencies.
[9:44:44] if we choose to do so, we could share with other other law
[9:44:46] enforcement agencies. And do you share with federal
[9:44:49] law enforcement agencies? We do not share with federal law
[9:44:51] enforcement agencies. There is a what's called a
[9:44:54] national lookup tool. We were sharing information and
[9:44:58] there are some agencies that are in there.
[9:44:59] I don't believe any of them are federal law enforcement
[9:45:02] agencies, but I don't I don't think we have a full list of all
[9:45:05] the agencies that are in there. So again, that's another reason
[9:45:08] why it's a good time to take a look at that as I come in, due
[9:45:10] to the seat. Okay.
[9:45:12] well, I will ask you if we can relook at that file and make
[9:45:15] sure we're not sharing that information.
[9:45:21] okay. So last year we passed a
[9:45:24] resolution. The sense of the council on
[9:45:27] supporting humane and trauma informed responses to behavioral
[9:45:30] health crisis resolution of 2025.
[9:45:34] and we made several recommendations to multiple
[9:45:38] agencies, including mpd, to include assigning co-response
[9:45:42] teams to relevant behavioral mental health crises.
[9:45:49] do you think that there are sufficient staffing numbers in
[9:45:52] the co-response teams to be able to respond to behavioral health
[9:45:56] crises and calls? I'd like to see there.
[9:45:59] I would like to see there be more more partnerships.
[9:46:02] I think there's value in the program.
[9:46:04] so I think that from what we've seen, as far as the usefulness
[9:46:08] of it, I think it would be good to have more teams.
[9:46:13] okay, I agree, so thank you and we'll hope to fund more of that
[9:46:17] in this year's budget. So we talked to director cross
[9:46:21] from the office of police complaints about some of the
[9:46:24] trends that he's seeing and complaints that have come in.
[9:46:28] how often do you have retraining for officers on body worn camera
[9:46:35] footage? Noncompliance?
[9:46:36] that was an area that he spoke to as being a common trend.
[9:46:40] and he also shared that there's this period of two minutes where
[9:46:45] the sound is off on body worn camera footage that generally
[9:46:51] has then kind of missed some information in the review.
[9:46:54] so what is your message to officers around training of
[9:46:58] turning on bwc? And then when we're finding that
[9:47:01] officers are in noncompliance, how do you deal with retraining.
[9:47:03] yeah. So so a couple of things.
[9:47:06] so bwc is have to be activated when officers either
[9:47:09] self-initiated or dispatched to a call, they're required to
[9:47:12] activate. When they activate that's when
[9:47:14] the video starts with the audio. Prior to them doing that.
[9:47:17] that's where that two minute buffer that director crowe
[9:47:20] speaks about. That's the area where before
[9:47:21] they've actually pushed the button, it's always recording,
[9:47:23] just not the audio. And my understanding is it has
[9:47:26] something to do with the amount of data as it relates to that.
[9:47:29] so there's two minutes before you push the button that's
[9:47:32] always there. That's that window that's there.
[9:47:34] as far as actual training, when the officers are in the academy,
[9:47:38] as part of the recruit training, we've integrated the bwc into
[9:47:41] their their training. So just as they're going through
[9:47:44] as part just like if you're doing a traffic stop, it's not
[9:47:46] you're just learning about how to do a traffic stop.
[9:47:48] part of that is getting dispatched to call activating
[9:47:51] your bwc, going up there, learning how to tag the bwc.
[9:47:54] so those are things that officers are taught in the
[9:47:56] academy. With that being said, there's
[9:47:58] always reminders and things that are needed like that.
[9:48:00] so, for example, last year in january and january, we put out
[9:48:05] a bwc training reminder. These are what that is is we'll
[9:48:09] do roll call training, which is every day in roll call.
[9:48:12] officers have a training topic that's out there, and the topic
[9:48:16] usually repeats 4 or 5 times a month.
[9:48:18] so there's usually I believe it's 6 or 7 topics.
[9:48:21] and then they repeat. So they're getting it multiple
[9:48:23] times a month. Again to kind of reinforce that.
[9:48:25] we use that as an opportunity when we start to see issues or
[9:48:28] problems or just things that we think we need a quick reminder
[9:48:30] roll call, you know, take five minutes to talk about just to
[9:48:33] keep those reminders that are out there.
[9:48:35] so that's something that we did in january.
[9:48:37] we also did it last year in april.
[9:48:39] and it's something else that we'll continue to push forward
[9:48:41] with that. With that being said, if there
[9:48:43] are cases that are where there's a bwc violation, members fail to
[9:48:48] activate those activations, those are investigated.
[9:48:51] and then, of course, depending on, you know, the situation, is
[9:48:55] it their first, first delayed activation or is it their 10th,
[9:48:59] for example? Depends on what the outcome is
[9:49:02] as far as discipline. So there is an investigation.
[9:49:04] if it is sustained, then they receive the appropriate
[9:49:08] discipline as appropriate. Depending on the circumstances
[9:49:10] of it. Okay.
[9:49:14] well I appreciate you kind of looking into that as it sounded
[9:49:18] like that trend is continuing around noncompliance for bwc and
[9:49:25] especially in this state of affairs where we have so much
[9:49:28] additional presence in the city, that footage is just very
[9:49:33] important to us and to the public.
[9:49:35] no, I mean, I personally, I think bwc is is one of the most
[9:49:38] valuable tools we've had in recent times for the officers,
[9:49:41] for the community. I think it helps to to take
[9:49:43] things that are alleged out of the way.
[9:49:45] and if there are things that need to be retrained or areas to
[9:49:47] be identified, it allows us to do that.
[9:49:51] well, thank you. So one of the areas that you and
[9:49:55] I and the former chief have worked closely together on for
[9:49:59] many years is our staffing challenges.
[9:50:01] at mpd. We are now at around 3150
[9:50:05] officers, which I think is a crisis and a huge problem.
[9:50:10] we have to have more local mpd officers who are here and can
[9:50:16] handle our policing efforts, and we've tried a lot of different
[9:50:20] things over the last couple of years.
[9:50:21] we've increased bonuses and tuition and housing assistance.
[9:50:25] we. Just, you know, last week
[9:50:28] changed the retirement age, eliminated the retirement age.
[9:50:32] we worked with you all on changing the college credit
[9:50:34] requirements and partnering with udc.
[9:50:38] what has been working because the numbers keep going in the
[9:50:43] wrong direction. Hopefully my drop bill will pass
[9:50:46] soon. It's in the committee of the
[9:50:48] whole which will, as you know, allow officers to earn their
[9:50:52] retirement benefits but still stay on the force.
[9:50:55] but how can we make a deeper impact on recruitment and
[9:51:01] retention and rebuilding our local police force, which needs
[9:51:05] more officers to handle our local policing?
[9:51:08] no. And to your point, we've done a
[9:51:09] lot of things to try to address it.
[9:51:10] and it's almost like as we as we move things, the goalposts keep
[9:51:14] moving or the things that we do. Other people, for lack of a
[9:51:17] better word, steal our ideas and then they implement them.
[9:51:19] things like when we initially put out the bonus, we started to
[9:51:22] see an increase and it didn't take very long at all for
[9:51:24] everybody else to either do the same thing.
[9:51:26] so again, this this region is one of the most competitive when
[9:51:29] it comes to law enforcement. So looking at what we can do, I
[9:51:32] know last year we were able to make some movement on the
[9:51:36] educational requirement. But at this point and I
[9:51:37] mentioned in my testimony the only agency that is now has that
[9:51:41] as a requirement. When you come into the
[9:51:43] department is arlington county, and they're getting ready to go
[9:51:45] up to $90,000 a year as a starting salary, where we start
[9:51:51] at $75,000. So there's challenges with that,
[9:51:52] right? I think an area where we can
[9:51:54] make some ground out with that is to look at the the education
[9:51:58] requirement. And, you know, we kind of have
[9:52:00] proffered this idea last year. We got a little ground with it.
[9:52:03] but the ability there's a program that's out there through
[9:52:06] one of the community colleges, and I think there's others we
[9:52:08] could look at that would give the ability for individuals to
[9:52:12] enter the academy without any college credit.
[9:52:14] and through the police academy and some additional classes to
[9:52:17] leave before graduation, they would achieve the 60 college
[9:52:21] credits. I think that would be a way for
[9:52:23] us to open the window to to another applicant pool that
[9:52:27] would be out there. I know last year, the, you know,
[9:52:29] chief smith worked very hard on getting the additional the
[9:52:32] credits down for the 15. But the challenge with that is
[9:52:34] we haven't seen at this point anyone who's in that area where
[9:52:37] they have 45 or more and just need 15 to get in, I hope, I
[9:52:41] think on our end was potentially was it a tool where we could get
[9:52:45] some cadets in that program earlier?
[9:52:47] but with that, the cadets are in like a cohort program through
[9:52:50] udc. So the credits that they would
[9:52:51] get through the academy, they're already getting through their
[9:52:54] their program, so it doesn't allow them to pull out there.
[9:52:57] I think that's an area where we're going to we could see some
[9:53:01] some, some benefit to that because again, at the end of the
[9:53:03] day, they're still going to have the college credits.
[9:53:05] they still have to pass those courses.
[9:53:07] and if they don't, then they won't meet the requirements and
[9:53:09] they won't be able to be a police officer.
[9:53:12] but you know, again, I said it earlier, but there are so many
[9:53:15] other opportunities out there and things like the $70,000
[9:53:18] hiring bonus, the retention bonus.
[9:53:20] it's your point. I think the drop program would
[9:53:22] be very beneficial in keeping people similar to what park
[9:53:25] police is doing with their retention bonus to keep people
[9:53:27] for a few more years. We really need to stabilize if
[9:53:30] we can keep people for a few more years and then push up
[9:53:33] that. That will give us some breathing
[9:53:35] room. If we can get more people in
[9:53:36] that door to really make that up, because you're spot on.
[9:53:38] I mean, you know, these the federal folks that are here, if
[9:53:41] we can get our numbers back up, that allows us to get rid of
[9:53:45] them. And then we have we as a city
[9:53:47] have full control over the policing in the city, the police
[9:53:50] department, how what we want the mpd officers to do here in the
[9:53:52] city. So it's just beneficial overall.
[9:53:55] and then aside from all that, the officers.
[9:53:57] right? I mean, the officers, we talk a
[9:53:59] lot about overtime and overtime. It's very expensive.
[9:54:01] but there is a human toll on the officers as it relates to that.
[9:54:05] and I know people say, oh, officers love to overtime.
[9:54:07] yeah, to a point they do. But this has an impact.
[9:54:09] when we have these events, they have to be staffed.
[9:54:12] and it's not like they have the option to do that.
[9:54:14] so I mean, there's an impact on the officers personally, their
[9:54:18] well-being, their families, and that doesn't go lightly on me
[9:54:20] because we continue to ask more and more as our numbers go down.
[9:54:24] so it really is an area we just have to continue to work on
[9:54:27] because, as I said, everybody else is moving what they're
[9:54:30] doing, which then pushes us to have to try to move, to continue
[9:54:33] to be inventive and think of different things, to get people
[9:54:35] in the door, to get us where we need to be to keep the city
[9:54:39] safe. Well, I certainly don't want to.
[9:54:43] create a promo for any of the federal agencies that are that
[9:54:48] are hiring, but just as a reference check, like where are
[9:54:52] our our our bonuses across the board, just much lower than all
[9:54:56] of the. So yeah.
[9:54:57] so we're we're 25,000 and they range from 50,000 to $70,000 is
[9:55:02] where the region at right now. And if we provided a higher
[9:55:07] bonus, do you think we would save time over on overtime?
[9:55:11] I do, I think overall because it's an initial I think if we
[9:55:14] hire, if we offered more as an initial bonus, and I think that
[9:55:17] if we were to also marry that with looking at that, the
[9:55:20] requirement as far as the college, because I think that
[9:55:22] opens a window of other people that could then could then be in
[9:55:27] there with, again, not letting us actually overall reduce our
[9:55:31] requirements because they still will have those credits.
[9:55:32] I mean, it's a benefit for them. They come in, they leave with 60
[9:55:36] credits of college, you know, through our tuition
[9:55:38] reimbursement program, they can continue on the department and
[9:55:41] work that all the way to bachelor's or master's or
[9:55:43] whatever as they're on the department.
[9:55:45] so I think for for someone who may not have any level of
[9:55:48] college for them to come to the department, get a good job, get
[9:55:51] college credit while learning a skill set, and then continue
[9:55:54] that on and build that up to a bachelor's or master's through
[9:55:56] our other programs. I think that's where you look at
[9:55:59] the benefit. Continuing from that.
[9:56:02] well, absolutely. And, you know, you have my
[9:56:04] support with that. We tried to move that last year,
[9:56:06] but we had some disagreement among colleagues about the right
[9:56:10] level. So we we ended in this piecemeal
[9:56:12] fashion. I think that's very interesting
[9:56:15] information that nobody has been eligible in that category.
[9:56:19] that's a big problem. So we were hoping that would
[9:56:22] move the numbers. And so I invite you to be part
[9:56:26] of kind of a reconsideration with, with my colleagues around
[9:56:29] making sure that we can get people into this field and
[9:56:34] recognizing that a college degree is not for everybody.
[9:56:36] I think we're seeing that shift across a lot of different
[9:56:39] industries across the country. So happy to continue working
[9:56:43] with you on that. Absolutely.
[9:56:45] in terms of the bonuses. So putting aside this may be a
[9:56:51] question for you on the budget side, but putting aside the
[9:56:55] overtime spent that we can get reimbursed through the federal
[9:56:59] government, how much local overtime are we spending a year
[9:57:04] or this past year, local overtime?
[9:57:11] local overtime last year was 76 million.
[9:57:16] was 76 million. And how much is the average
[9:57:18] recruit class over the last six months of this fiscal year?
[9:57:23] that's something like how many officers were in there in each
[9:57:25] recruit class on average. Yeah.
[9:57:28] and again, this is kind of off the top.
[9:57:29] my head I would say average maybe 12 or 13.
[9:57:31] we have some that go higher, some that come lower.
[9:57:34] our goals right now currently 16.
[9:57:36] but we're we're not quite there at class that's in right now is
[9:57:40] ten okay. And I'm just thinking out loud
[9:57:45] here. But you know, if we were to
[9:57:48] provide $100,000 bonus, beating all of the other federal agents
[9:57:53] for a short period of time, that would be so much less than all
[9:57:57] of the overtime we're spending, right?
[9:58:00] yes. I mean, getting officers in and
[9:58:02] I mean, the amount the rate they're paid at on overtime.
[9:58:05] and again, when we have to shift, change, make shifts to
[9:58:09] not only working the hours, but we changed our tours and things
[9:58:11] like that. There's additional penalties
[9:58:13] associated with it. So yeah, I mean, getting people
[9:58:14] in the door overall would save the overtime.
[9:58:18] okay. I want to ask you about kind of
[9:58:20] systems upgrades. One of the.
[9:58:24] concerns that I've heard from officers is just some of the
[9:58:28] kind of rudimentary way that we're dealing with some staffing
[9:58:34] and overtime issues. Have you all thought about any
[9:58:37] other ai technology that could help with deployment decisions
[9:58:42] and staffing and making sure that to your point of someone
[9:58:45] being burnt out with overtime, that, you know, we're not
[9:58:49] putting the same person over and over and over on the shifts and
[9:58:52] kind of managing a little bit more fairly, taking out some of
[9:58:55] the human error. Yes.
[9:58:56] so since I've been in the seat, we've been looking at some
[9:58:58] different technologies that I think that potentially could
[9:59:01] help us with, with not only crime data, but deployment
[9:59:05] providing a different variety of data sources in there and using
[9:59:07] technology to do that. Obviously, before we we actually
[9:59:11] implemented the ai. You know, there's a whole ai
[9:59:12] values and group that looks at that.
[9:59:13] and we want to have conversations because we know
[9:59:16] that ai, there are concerns from the community also about the
[9:59:18] implementation of ai and what that looks like.
[9:59:20] so before we do that, I definitely think we want to have
[9:59:23] that conversation. But I do think anything we can
[9:59:25] do to leverage the technology and some of our scheduling
[9:59:29] aspects and some of the districts, we are using a
[9:59:31] technology over there. Some of the things we're looking
[9:59:33] at, is there a way to leverage that department wide, which I
[9:59:35] think would be beneficial? We did upgrade our time and
[9:59:38] attendance system about 2 or 3 years ago.
[9:59:40] I think that's been very helpful overall in that.
[9:59:43] so again, since we are down resources as far as staffing,
[9:59:47] looking at how we can we leverage that.
[9:59:49] you know, a lot of the a lot of the issues with that is they
[9:59:51] cost money. So again, it's not it's not
[9:59:54] going to be free. But but again, in the long run I
[9:59:57] think it would the value would push forward with that.
[9:59:59] so it's definitely an area we're looking at.
[10:00:01] chief robinson, his team kind of looking at different
[10:00:04] technologies and how that can help us.
[10:00:07] what are you hearing from officers or that you're seeing
[10:00:10] on the policy side of things, and how?
[10:00:16] how we're supporting them or supporting retention?
[10:00:20] you know, it's a mixed bag. I definitely think that the
[10:00:25] overtime conversations, the force details, when I say force
[10:00:27] details, things like state of the union was yesterday, we have
[10:00:30] to have a full activation because of some of the things
[10:00:34] that are going on, the resources that are needed.
[10:00:36] again, that goes back to morale. Those are force details.
[10:00:38] so when you start looking at people where things like I could
[10:00:42] leave dc and I could go to arlington county and I could
[10:00:45] make $90,000 out of the gate, and my workload is completely
[10:00:48] less. And my, my work life balance is
[10:00:51] better. Those are things, especially as
[10:00:53] officers. Come on, you know, years ago,
[10:00:54] kind of the the thought was within the agency after about
[10:00:58] five years, kind of people are going to leave, they're going to
[10:00:59] leave. But we see officers now that are
[10:01:02] farther along in their career that do look and take those
[10:01:05] options to leave where we haven't seen that.
[10:01:06] so I think again, it's, you know, a lot of these things are
[10:01:10] interconnected, but that that plays on that, you know, morale,
[10:01:12] the amount of hours the officers have to work, play a role into
[10:01:16] all that. What else do you think could be
[10:01:20] done to ensure that more of our officers are district residents?
[10:01:24] we have now only 18% of sworn officers live in the district.
[10:01:35] have there been any programs that have been effective in
[10:01:37] moving that? How could we make sure that it's
[10:01:39] more district residents representing?
[10:01:42] yeah, this is this is an area that we've talked a lot about
[10:01:44] over the years about how can we get people in the city that I
[10:01:46] think the elf in the room is the cost of living in the city is
[10:01:49] expensive, right? Especially when most new
[10:01:51] officers coming in from the area.
[10:01:53] so they're looking at the cost. So is there a way to subsidize
[10:01:56] housing? You know, we have some short
[10:01:58] term housing things. When people first come in the
[10:02:00] agency to help them get here and look at that.
[10:02:02] but are there things we can do on the housing front, incentives
[10:02:05] we can provide? I don't know what that looks
[10:02:07] like. If it's a tax incentive or other
[10:02:08] things that may be beneficial to help officers come in, because
[10:02:11] there is a benefit to being in the city.
[10:02:13] but then when you start outweighing that with the cost
[10:02:15] of housing and families and things like that, it's a lot.
[10:02:18] so, you know, officers, they're always weighing those benefits.
[10:02:24] yes. And I think all many roads lead
[10:02:28] to cost of housing. And is certainly important to
[10:02:32] make sure we're continuing to build more housing in the city
[10:02:35] and have more affordable housing available.
[10:02:37] so we'll keep working on that and thinking about ways,
[10:02:42] especially as we see more and more vacancies with these gsa
[10:02:46] buildings, would love those to be additional opportunities to
[10:02:48] provide more housing in the city, especially to our first
[10:02:53] responders and people across d.c.
[10:02:56] one of the things I'm concerned about is once we get people in
[10:02:59] the door, like if we, you know, we've got them with the bonuses
[10:03:03] or the tuition assistance, making sure that they stay.
[10:03:07] and I know we have long term retention challenges, but your
[10:03:11] response is recorded that 10% of recruits that were hired in fy
[10:03:16] 2025 are no longer active at mpd.
[10:03:19] that feels like a large number that didn't make it through the
[10:03:23] year. What do you think is happening
[10:03:25] there? I think there's a lot of pulls
[10:03:26] with that. There are some people who decide
[10:03:29] that policing are for them. There's some people that get
[10:03:31] wooed away by other law enforcement agencies for some of
[10:03:34] these other bonuses and things like that that we talked, talked
[10:03:37] about. There's some folks, once they
[10:03:39] get the training here, they look to return to whatever.
[10:03:41] if they're not from the area to what other area they may be.
[10:03:44] so I think there's there's a lot of things that go in there, but
[10:03:47] I think a lot of it also goes back to some of the
[10:03:49] competitiveness of this area. We had some folks that didn't
[10:03:52] have very much time on probably under two years that recently
[10:03:54] left and went to park police again, back to some of the
[10:03:57] incentives. You've already been trained how
[10:03:59] to police in the district. You know the area.
[10:04:02] you know what park police do, and they're offering all these
[10:04:05] incentives. You have two years on, a year on
[10:04:07] out of the academy, other than repaying a portion of that.
[10:04:10] but if they're going to give you $70,000, that's not really, you
[10:04:13] know, that big of a concern. So I think that there's, again,
[10:04:16] a lot of options that are out there for them.
[10:04:18] and the work of mpd is very unique, that's for sure.
[10:04:21] it's different than any other agency.
[10:04:22] and a good way, I think, because you can do so many different
[10:04:25] things and we have so many different opportunities.
[10:04:29] all right. So I think two years ago was we
[10:04:35] tried something new with mpd, with these community safety
[10:04:39] ambassadors. And last year you all said the
[10:04:42] community safety ambassador program was not successful and
[10:04:45] has been disbanded. Can you elaborate a little on
[10:04:48] what happened there? Why didn't it work and what ever
[10:04:51] happened to that money? Sure.
[10:04:53] so we'll start with the money. As far as my understanding, the
[10:04:56] money is the the money was reallocated to other positions
[10:04:58] within the agency. And when I get down, I miss
[10:05:00] campbell can probably talk a little bit about that.
[10:05:02] some of the folks that were community safety ambassadors
[10:05:04] were placed inside other positions across the agency.
[10:05:07] as the program was disbanded. Some of the challenges that we
[10:05:10] saw with that, I think the initial idea was, was good,
[10:05:13] right? I mean, it sounded like a way to
[10:05:16] potentially have some duties that were there.
[10:05:17] but when we really got down to the operationalizing of it, what
[10:05:21] the duties they were able to do, what they weren't able to do,
[10:05:25] the deployment of them, the supervision of them, there was a
[10:05:27] lot of challenges that because a lot of times, you know, you
[10:05:30] think you're going as a police officer, you think you're going
[10:05:32] to the call for x, and when you get there, there's y.
[10:05:34] and when it's something that's outside of their scope, then you
[10:05:37] run to these challenges of what they can do.
[10:05:40] so, you know, we had some areas that they were they were helpful
[10:05:42] with, you know, for increased visibility and presence.
[10:05:45] but I think the initial concept of kind of what they could do
[10:05:48] and then what they turned out to be were not one and the same.
[10:05:50] so the folks that we did have we did have some challenges with
[10:05:53] retention and, and. Concerns with some of the folks
[10:05:57] that were hired. So some separated through
[10:06:00] natural processes. And then, patricia, do you know
[10:06:02] how many we re allocated within the agency?
[10:06:07] I would actually have to get back on the number and to what
[10:06:11] positions that they were converted to, if that's okay.
[10:06:13] okay. Sure.
[10:06:14] that would be great. But please do, because I asked
[10:06:17] this last year at performance oversight and we never got heard
[10:06:20] back. Thank you.
[10:06:24] so one of the pieces of thinking about this new program at the
[10:06:28] time was that let's have officers do policing and let's
[10:06:33] have other people be these community ambassadors who can.
[10:06:37] maybe they don't have police training and they're not
[10:06:40] traditional sworn officers, but they can answer phones and help
[10:06:42] with paperwork and take off some of that burden.
[10:06:45] so just substantively, like, why did that model not work?
[10:06:50] so what they were what they were doing was more of forward
[10:06:53] facing. So some of the positions that we
[10:06:55] did move them into, I know, were more of our customer service
[10:06:57] representatives. So our folks that are at
[10:07:00] districts that take reports and do things like that, so not so
[10:07:02] far from, I think what the what the idea was potentially, but
[10:07:06] what they were was a uniform, a uniform presence that were going
[10:07:11] out on the street. And then when they got out
[10:07:12] there, their actual ability to do a lot of the functions that
[10:07:15] people expected them to be able to do were challenging.
[10:07:19] so I do know the community service csas that we have in the
[10:07:24] districts were some of them went, I think there might have
[10:07:25] been some cell block tech positions, civilian professional
[10:07:29] staff positions that they migrated into as well.
[10:07:32] but we'll get you the full breakdown.
[10:07:36] thank you. Are there any new initiatives
[10:07:39] that you think we should be prioritizing this year?
[10:07:42] the budget, you know, right now I you know, you highlight
[10:07:46] technology. Always looking at technology is
[10:07:48] something for us. You know the cameras is an area
[10:07:51] we're continuing to work on to build up the cctv cameras on
[10:07:55] that aspect of it. As I mentioned, the value that
[10:07:57] that has, we talked a little bit about lpr, but cameras have that
[10:07:59] value too of something happens. The ability to get an image,
[10:08:02] push it out to the force. If we can identify and locate
[10:08:05] that person quicker, obviously to get things down.
[10:08:08] so looking those areas, there is another another spot that we're
[10:08:12] continuing to push forward with because as our numbers are down,
[10:08:14] as we talked about, what can we do to try to leverage or take
[10:08:18] away things that officers don't have to do to make it more
[10:08:20] efficient. So we looked at some different
[10:08:22] products, even as it comes to like how we write reports.
[10:08:24] and would that be beneficial just to think about giving
[10:08:27] officers more time to do policing activities?
[10:08:30] okay. Thank you.
[10:08:32] let's talk a little bit about interactions that you all have
[10:08:36] with young people and training around there.
[10:08:38] first, I want to check in on the juvenile investigative response
[10:08:41] unit or the jiru, which seeks to prevent youth crime, reduce
[10:08:46] recidivism, and foster stronger community partnerships.
[10:08:49] and your pre-hearing responses. You noted that the giro has
[10:08:53] advanced adoption of pattern based investigation,
[10:08:57] strengthened school partnerships, and implemented
[10:09:00] rapid re-engagement strategies for absconded youth.
[10:09:03] what is adoption of pattern based investigations mean, and
[10:09:07] how has that been effective? Sure.
[10:09:09] so like a lot of crimes, juvenile crime is not that much
[10:09:12] different. There's a lot of pattern crimes,
[10:09:13] you know, small group of folks that are engaged in criminal
[10:09:16] activity. So looking at that, you know,
[10:09:18] why are they engaged? Are there other resources or
[10:09:21] other agencies we can connect them in with?
[10:09:23] so reassigning those investigations from typically
[10:09:26] criminal investigations division within a district, let's just
[10:09:28] say might handle it if it was robberies or things like that.
[10:09:31] and they may be spread across different districts by assigning
[10:09:34] to giro, letting them to look at it, especially when we if we
[10:09:37] know from the outset there's juveniles involved with that,
[10:09:40] you know, it helps them to identify those patterns, bring
[10:09:43] those together and bring those closures and they work.
[10:09:45] they're part of our youth investigations division that's
[10:09:49] over there. So they you know, they have sros
[10:09:51] and other youth facing folks that are there with them to help
[10:09:54] work on that and get some strategies.
[10:09:57] also working with absconders, getting those back into custody
[10:10:00] with doctors and kind of working on that area as well.
[10:10:02] so it's an area where, you know, we stood up last year trying to
[10:10:05] evaluate kind of its effectiveness.
[10:10:06] we see some effectiveness. So that's another area where I'm
[10:10:09] trying to look at, you know, some more protocols and
[10:10:11] procedures. So how can we again try to
[10:10:14] enhance what we can get out of them to, to address some of
[10:10:17] these, mitigate some of these things on the front end?
[10:10:21] okay. Well thank you for that update.
[10:10:23] and I think we'll be important as we head into the spring to
[10:10:28] think about what is working, especially as we see the trends
[10:10:33] not not resulting as as an as much success as we're seeing on
[10:10:37] the adult side. And so I want to make sure we're
[10:10:41] continuing to lean into what is working, but try new things if
[10:10:45] if we need to. On the juvenile curfew zones,
[10:10:48] how many of these zones have been established since you
[10:10:52] gained authority to do so? Sure.
[10:10:54] so if memory serves, we've had, I don't want to 15.
[10:10:58] yeah, we have 15, 15 total. Okay.
[10:11:02] and are you finding that the more effective piece of this
[10:11:07] authorization is from the establishment of a zone itself
[10:11:10] or the earlier curfew time? In my opinion, I think it's the
[10:11:15] establishment of the zone itself.
[10:11:16] I think it's the posting of the zone.
[10:11:18] it's putting it out publicly. When we do these zones, we don't
[10:11:21] just do them to do them. There's usually a reason why
[10:11:23] there's a someone's going on social media posting whatever.
[10:11:27] so as we're still doing the curfew zone and working through
[10:11:30] that part of it, we're also, as I talked about earlier,
[10:11:32] investigative services bureau, trying to identify who's the
[10:11:35] poster. Can we get back to them?
[10:11:36] can we get them to take it down? You know, parental involvement
[10:11:40] in that. What does that look like to try
[10:11:42] to address it so it doesn't happen.
[10:11:44] and we have been successful in several cases with that.
[10:11:47] but I do think with the zones, the ability for a it to be
[10:11:51] clearly defined where it's at, to push it out publicly and to
[10:11:54] have those additional resources in the area, I think it's
[10:11:57] helpful with those. From what we've seen.
[10:12:00] okay. Our officers trained differently
[10:12:07] on how to interact appropriately with young people versus adults.
[10:12:11] I wouldn't say they're overall trained how to act differently.
[10:12:14] I mean, they are trained on some of the nuances of young people.
[10:12:17] there are certain people within the department or sros that have
[10:12:20] more specific training because their interactions is more with
[10:12:22] that. But we put out training of how
[10:12:24] to interact with juveniles as things change, like when our
[10:12:28] curfew zones came out, pushing out, you know, the curfew
[10:12:31] enforcement, making sure people are aware of it and how to
[10:12:33] implement it. So as things change, like we
[10:12:35] talked about earlier with the roll call training, or if we
[10:12:38] start to see issues or areas of improvement put in that kind of
[10:12:41] training inside of our roll call training, our professional
[10:12:44] development training that we push out to the force, don't you
[10:12:48] think that officers should be trained on interactions with
[10:12:52] young people and how those differ or should differ than an
[10:12:55] interaction with an adult? No, I think there is some value
[10:12:58] with that. Obviously, there's a lot of
[10:12:59] there's a lot of things that we have to train people on, and
[10:13:02] some of the basic things about how we interact with the young
[10:13:05] person, although there could be some nuances, some things like
[10:13:07] being respectful, engaging them, those are no different with an
[10:13:09] adult or a young person. Like we should be respectful.
[10:13:12] we should be treating them within the constitutional
[10:13:14] guidelines. There are some nuances with
[10:13:16] that. So it's not an area I'm against,
[10:13:19] you know, enhancing training on. But there are a lot of competing
[10:13:22] interests that are there. So it is something in the
[10:13:24] academy you get specific training about how to interact
[10:13:27] with juveniles, about how to interact with juveniles that's
[10:13:30] out there. So it's not that they don't get
[10:13:31] it, but, you know, there are special areas like the sros that
[10:13:34] get even more enhanced training as it relates to that.
[10:13:39] okay. And I know you all go through a
[10:13:40] lot of training, but it just strikes me as an area that
[10:13:43] should be specifically trained for.
[10:13:45] I mean, of course, in all contexts, officers should be
[10:13:48] respectful and constitutional, but young people's minds are not
[10:13:52] fully developed yet. There's an added, you know, fear
[10:13:57] around authority or could be a lack of understanding your
[10:14:00] rights. And so, especially with an
[10:14:04] agency that has so much exposure to young people and with the
[10:14:09] continuation possibly of these zones, it feels like a
[10:14:13] worthwhile, specific training area.
[10:14:15] absolutely. Okay.
[10:14:17] thank you. Okay.
[10:14:19] so one of the capital projects that I'm really worried about is
[10:14:24] the state of the mpd substations.
[10:14:30] and I hear this a lot from our officers.
[10:14:34] I see this myself and I visit our mpd facilities, and these
[10:14:40] are facilities that need to be up to date and functional.
[10:14:43] 24 over seven. And, you know, we talked a
[10:14:45] little bit about the pay, but I also think it demonstrates our
[10:14:49] value to our officers and recognizing that we want them to
[10:14:52] be working in habitable places that are, you know, warm in the
[10:14:56] winter and cool in the summer and don't have leaks.
[10:15:00] and last year, when I asked the chief about this, I believe she
[10:15:05] told me that all of the substations were on track to be
[10:15:09] modernized. It now looks like.
[10:15:13] so we added an enhancement of $1.6 million last year and
[10:15:19] $950,000 over the financial plan for building renovations and
[10:15:22] construction for renovating the training academy facility.
[10:15:26] so I guess, what's the status of of that facility?
[10:15:30] but also, are there plans in the pipeline to renovate and update
[10:15:34] all of our substations? So a couple of things with that.
[10:15:37] so there is a so the seventh district is their closest
[10:15:40] facility. That's that's to be fully
[10:15:42] renovated. And actually it's a it's a tear
[10:15:45] and rebuild. My understanding with that is on
[10:15:47] the latest timeline sometime later this year.
[10:15:49] there should be a groundbreaking.
[10:15:51] obviously it's a multi year project where they'll build a
[10:15:53] new station and then tear down the the older station there.
[10:15:57] so that is in the pipeline. It's been in the pipeline for
[10:16:00] several years. We've seen designs and things
[10:16:02] like that. So that's that is moving along
[10:16:04] with that. The training academy.
[10:16:06] I understand that's a joint training academy with the the
[10:16:08] fire and ems. I know that that conversation is
[10:16:11] there. I think it was pushed out
[10:16:12] another year. Patricia, do you know?
[10:16:16] I can follow up on the schedule of that?
[10:16:18] I do know that it is in collaboration with them, so that
[10:16:22] that is probably the next one that's closest with that.
[10:16:25] but all their facilities outside the first district and the sixth
[10:16:29] district, they've been there. They're newer, they're
[10:16:31] refurbished, buildings are in need of improvements.
[10:16:35] with that being said, our fourth district is just wrapping up in
[10:16:37] a renovation specifically for its cellblock.
[10:16:41] the fifth district is cellblock is closed now for improvements
[10:16:45] and renovations. As it relates to that.
[10:16:47] so they will continue to to work to improve those areas.
[10:16:51] but outside of that, all of our facilities have challenges that
[10:16:54] we're continuing to work with. Dgs.
[10:16:56] when I took over in the seat, one of the the tasks, the
[10:16:59] challenges I gave to assistant chief robinson that oversees
[10:17:01] their technical services bureau is to he's been working with
[10:17:04] dgs, you know, just to identify do a full walkthrough involving
[10:17:08] the the fop union folks, dgs and us to get a full overlay of each
[10:17:13] of the facilities and the challenges.
[10:17:14] and what can we do to try to get some, even some quick hits to
[10:17:18] improve some of the minor things?
[10:17:19] to your point, we go back to morale, money and all those
[10:17:22] kinds of things are one aspect, but making sure that the
[10:17:24] facilities that you report to are up to par is important as
[10:17:27] well. So that's an area to just
[10:17:29] continue to work with dgs to try to prioritize those areas.
[10:17:32] important. But many of our facilities are
[10:17:35] in need of, you know, full replacement in the future for
[10:17:38] sure. Okay.
[10:17:40] and I'm happy to hear that seventh district is on track.
[10:17:43] I was there a couple weeks ago and it just it's the worst of
[10:17:48] all. Certainly needs an update and
[10:17:52] upgrade. But I'll also just just point
[10:17:55] out 2d and 3d where I recently was was at 2d, 3d 5040.
[10:17:59] yeah, they all have. They all have challenges.
[10:18:01] they all have challenges. They really all do.
[10:18:03] and so just as you know, I want to support your priorities for
[10:18:07] the budget. But as we talk about technology
[10:18:09] and staffing, I just want to make sure we're all on the same
[10:18:12] page of working together on on leaning on dgs and making sure
[10:18:17] that those renovations are prioritized in the budget.
[10:18:23] yes, ma'am. Okay.
[10:18:28] all right. Well, I know you must be bummed,
[10:18:32] but I think we are nearing the end of our time together today.
[10:18:39] chief, as always, I want to give you an opportunity.
[10:18:41] if you have any closing thoughts you want to share or anything
[10:18:45] you want to highlight that we didn't get a chance to talk
[10:18:47] about today? No, I just want to thank.
[10:18:49] thank you. Chairwoman, and thank the
[10:18:51] council members that were able to join us today.
[10:18:54] and again, some of these these conversations are tough and
[10:18:56] they're challenging. And hopefully I was able to
[10:18:58] provide some clarity or some insight and some of those areas,
[10:19:01] they're topics I know that will continue to come up and will
[10:19:03] continue to work together collaboratively on as we move
[10:19:05] forward. So I look forward to working
[10:19:06] with the council, with the community, and again, trying to
[10:19:08] work together as we get through these challenging times.
[10:19:11] so thank you very much for the invitation to to go over
[10:19:13] performance. And I just want to leave with
[10:19:15] saying thank you to the metropolitan police department.
[10:19:17] at the end of the day, it's the women and men of the
[10:19:20] metropolitan police department that come in day in and day out.
[10:19:22] they work the details, they go in the area, they respond to
[10:19:25] nine one one calls. They're interacting with their
[10:19:28] federal partners and trying to do what they can in those
[10:19:29] situations. And it's a tough situation.
[10:19:31] but the work that they do every day is what makes the city
[10:19:34] safer. So I just want to thank them for
[10:19:35] what they do. Well, thank you very much,
[10:19:40] chief, and thank you for all that you do.
[10:19:42] I want to just go over a couple of our follow ups, just to make
[10:19:46] sure we're on the same page, because there were a number of
[10:19:48] things that we talked about following up with.
[10:19:52] one was the incident with jose argueta and benito lopez from
[10:19:56] the washington post article requesting an investigation into
[10:19:59] those two incidents and identification of whether any
[10:20:03] mpd officers involved violated mpd law or district law.
[10:20:08] the us marshal shooting of julian bailey.
[10:20:12] additional information like what happened at the convenience
[10:20:14] store when mpd was on the scene, was mpd instructed to canvass?
[10:20:19] how did the us marshals and u.s. Park police find out about it?
[10:20:23] no, to be on the lookout. Did they get it through apb or
[10:20:25] were they on the scene with mpd? And why were they responding?
[10:20:31] without mpd? An update on the shootings.
[10:20:37] you know, the the body worn camera footage.
[10:20:40] I do think as the chief, it is footage that you should review
[10:20:46] yourself. I, I think there have only been
[10:20:49] three shootings from federal agents that I know about.
[10:20:55] so hopefully anytime there's a federal agent who shoots someone
[10:20:59] in d.c., I think it should rise to the level of our chief
[10:21:02] reviewing. I agree I wasn't the chief at
[10:21:03] the time. Yes, I have reviewed the one
[10:21:05] since I've been in the seat. A follow up around overtime for
[10:21:11] the top overtime earners. We had that one report that
[10:21:18] their 30,000 salary. Yep, the 38,106 hours.
[10:21:23] why the number of patrol officers was so reduced for
[10:21:26] street patrols. So we have the breakdown between
[10:21:29] street patrolling versus administrative coverage, a
[10:21:33] review of the lpr policy with cloud based technology, and a
[10:21:38] confirmation of who is getting that data.
[10:21:41] a look at the bwc noncompliance. And if we should get rid of that
[10:21:46] two minute gap period, and then a follow up around the community
[10:21:51] safety ambassadors and what happened there and where that
[10:21:53] funding was reallocated to. But I want to I want to thank
[10:22:00] you all again for being here. Everyone from the public, we had
[10:22:05] 110 witnesses today from the public, which I think really
[10:22:10] speaks to the concern that so many in dc have over the
[10:22:15] increase in federal presence in the city.
[10:22:18] what that means for immigration enforcement, and what it means
[10:22:21] to public access to transparency and justice in our city.
[10:22:26] and so I really appreciate you all being here for sharing your
[10:22:30] experiences, your concerns, your ideas, where moving legislation
[10:22:36] that I introduced yesterday around the body worn camera
[10:22:39] footage. There's other pieces of
[10:22:41] legislation on a permanent basis that we're considering in the
[10:22:44] committee, and we'll continue to work with the community and
[10:22:47] with. Mpd and all of our colleagues
[10:22:51] and everybody else to try to ensure we're doing everything we
[10:22:55] can every day to keep everyone in dc safe.
[10:22:59] that is, as I've always said, is our greatest responsibility and
[10:23:03] obligation as a government. And that means that everybody
[10:23:06] has to be safe. And so we will stay laser
[10:23:09] focused on that. I also want to thank you, chief
[10:23:13] carroll, for your leadership over the police department and
[10:23:17] everybody who works at mpd every single day.
[10:23:19] it feels like every year we say these are not easy times.
[10:23:24] and again, we're here again saying these are not easy times
[10:23:29] and we appreciate all that you do every day.
[10:23:31] we know it's hard. We know you hear it from a lot
[10:23:34] of different perspectives, but I know that mpd officers who work
[10:23:41] in all of our districts care deeply about our city, about
[10:23:45] serving our city, and about doing right by our city.
[10:23:49] and so we're going to continue working together to ensure that
[10:23:52] we can bolster our staffing numbers of our local police
[10:23:56] department, and to follow up on these measures to ensure that
[10:23:58] everybody can be accountable, as I also often say, we all have to
[10:24:03] follow the law, even those of us who enforce the law.
[10:24:07] and so that will continue to be an important value to all of us
[10:24:10] moving forward as we head through this spring and today.
[10:24:14] brought to light some gaps. I think that there are in both
[10:24:20] information and access to justice around some of these
[10:24:23] cases. So I look forward to continuing
[10:24:25] to work with you, chief, to fill some of those gaps and seeing
[10:24:28] what more we can do. But thank you all again.
[10:24:30] thank you to my team and the building team for being here all
[10:24:34] day. I know it's a late night and
[10:24:36] really appreciate the huge effort that you all put in as
[10:24:39] well. So with that, the time is 8:32
[10:24:43] p.m. And we are adjourned.