Commanders get called out

When an emergency happens in Kansas City, I want everyone on this department from the top down to be able to respond. That’s why we conducted a commander call-out earlier this week, the second since I took the office of Chief of Police.

The goal was to have all commanders (deputy chiefs, majors and captains) respond to and work through a critical incident exercise. I want all commanders to be more involved in large emergency events, and I want them to exercise their critical thinking in a situation they don’t face on a regular basis. It’s one of the reasons I require all commanders to do regular ride-alongs with patrol officers. I want them to stay in touch with street-level policing.

They did not know this week’s call-out was coming. The only people who knew were the five department members who created and administrated the exercise and me.

At 1:15 p.m. Monday, I ordered the Communications Unit (this was a test for them, as well) to notify all commanders to report to the Police Academy immediately, no matter where they were or what they were doing. Once there, they were randomly divided into groups and presented with the critical incident scenario: A man wearing an explosive vest walks into Police Headquarters during the Republican National Convention (which Kansas City is hoping to host in 2016) and demands the convention be stopped. We let them take the scenario from there. There weren’t necessarily any right answers. I wanted to ensure a few very basic points were covered – such as activating the Emergency Operations Center and calling an Operation 100 at Headquarters.

Everyone did an excellent job. I was impressed with their teamwork. No one pulled rank, and everyone listened to each other’s ideas. That cooperation is necessary because a critical incident of this scale would certainly be handled by a group of commanders, not just one. Working through this kind of scenario allowed them to activate and utilize all the resources the department has available, such as manpower, specialty units, federal partners, neighboring law enforcement agencies and other city departments like Emergency Management and Fire.

I want us to be responsive in a critical incident, not reactive. In the police world, those are two different things. Responding to an emergency means coming in with a rehearsed plan of action. It means police know what needs to be done and who needs to do it, and they put their plan into action as soon as possible. Reacting to an emergency means police are unprepared and chaos reigns. A critical incident is not the time to work out details. Exercises like this week’s ensure we are responsive.

Right after I became chief, we conducted a much less-involved exercise in which I ordered the Communications Unit to contact all commanders and tell them to come to a location to see how quickly they responded and how they used their take-home vehicles. That covered response, but I wanted this to engage their critical thinking skills.

This will not be the last time such a surprise exercise is conducted. Why? Because someday it might not be an exercise. It might be the real thing. If it is, I want a department of men and women who are prepared, regardless of their assignment. Future exercises will include regional, state and federal partners.

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org. 

Workplace bullying needs to be addressed

Heavy on my heart this morning is the subject of bullying – not cyber bullying, bullying at school or even sibling bullying – but workplace bullying. Bullying is not solely germane to those more commonly discussed areas. It frequently occurs in the workplace. 

I began writing this blog at 2:39 this morning. For some unknown reason, the topic was weighing on me with a sense of restlessness that I haven't felt in months. As I tried to discount the heaviness on my heart and to rationalize the restlessness as excitement for being on a few days of vacation, I realized I had to share the realities and perception of workplace bullying, especially in a law enforcement environment.

To the best of my knowledge, this topic has not been broached by any police department, and certainly not by the Kansas City Missouri Police Department.  Realizing that it might not resonate well for some, I'll risk stirring the pot because this is a serious issue. But it would be a risk well worth the effort if it positively impacts the manner in which people are treated. Some might ask, "Why shine the light on the problem?" Because we must speak for those who can't speak for themselves!

Let me be clear, the issue within the KCPD is not systemic or wide-spread. Many of the bullies are no longer associated with the police department. The Kansas City Police Department is composed of courteous, dedicated and servant-minded individuals who have proven their commitment to our city.

At least on a weekly basis, I stress to my executive-level command staff the importance of ensuring all members of the department be respectful, courteous and fair, and that they immediately intervene if anyone is behaving unprofessionally. They've been asked to share my request and concerns with those they lead. They've been told if they see something, say something, and that no one should suffer in silence. Recently, executive level staff was provided a copy of "The Bully at Work," by Gary Namie, PhD, & Ruth Namie, PhD. This is one of many steps we'll take toward better identifying, addressing and eventually alleviating such an emotionally damaging practice.

In May of this year, the department's lead attorney from the Office of General Counsel began gathering information regarding internal suits, claims and EEOC charges of discrimination. The information will be reviewed to determine if policy and/or patterns of practices need to be revised.

As I reflect on my 28-year career with this great organization, I can't help but reflect on the many real incidents of bullying. Oftentimes, the bullies were in higher ranks or positions than those who were being bullied. I've witnessed and have been the victim of bullying at KCPD.  I reported the bullying, and in most cases it was discounted as: "He does that to everyone," "You need thicker skin," or "Don't make any noise about that." As I progressed through the ranks of the department, I found better ways to confront bullies.

Throughout the years, many others have communicated their experiences, often hearing identical trite expressions from those who had the authority to intervene but didn’t. There have been incidents in which individuals were cursed out and even threatened, but no actions were taken against the bully. Transfers requests have been lost and denied without explanation. I've witnessed above-average yearly evaluations change to an employee who suddenly can't do anything right in the eyes of his immediate supervisor/commander. Most alarming, oftentimes no one intervened on behalf of the one being bullied. In some cases the bullies garnered the support of others, resulting in group bullying. The result in several cases was civil action being filed with monetary compensation being awarded to the bullied employee.

Although bullying can occur anywhere at any time, it's imperative to address bullying at its onset in a work environment. We must set the tone of non-tolerance, and most importantly, prevent the long-term emotional toll on those who are being bullied.

I encourage anyone who's being bullied to report the bullying to any supervisor or commander so the allegations can be properly investigated.

While not as prevalent as in my early years on the department, bullying still rears its destructive head far too often. I'll continue to promote employees who don't subscribe to the philosophy of going along to get along, but those who are willing to intervene to cease destructive practices, regardless of the personal consequences. I decided to express my feelings about this topic so others, within the department as well as those outside the department, might not stand by silently while others are tormented by unbridled bullies. I and many others have intervened to stop bullying over the years, and rest assured we'll continue to do so. My desire is that we create, nurture and maintain a bully-free environment and a culture that's comfortable sharing about any form of mistreatment.

I respectfully share this topic because it's important that all employees, as well as other segments of the community, understand what's being done to alleviate bullying within the KCPD. 

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org.  

Reducing gun violence: Local/federal partnerships make a difference

I authored the below letter with St. Louis Police Chief Sam Dotson and Chuck Wexler, director of the Police Executive Research Forum. It appears today as an "As We See It" column in the Kansas City Star.

The Missouri legislature is receiving national attention for passing a law that would attempt to nullify all federal gun laws within the state.  The legislation was vetoed by Gov. Jay Nixon, but the legislature may attempt to override that veto.

Most legal experts agree that the legislation is unconstitutional. The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution does not allow state legislatures to nullify federal laws.

As police officials we are concerned about this legislation because it would make it a state crime for our federal partners at the FBI, ATF, and other agencies to do their job of enforcing federal gun laws in Missouri. The prospect of Missouri officials trying to arrest federal agents is unimaginable, but that is what House Bill 436 would provide.

We find the legislation offensive for the disrespect it shows to federal law enforcement agents. Our partnerships with federal officials are a key part of our strategies for reducing gun violence. Federal criminal sentences for gun violence are usually more certain than those provided under state law.  And federal agencies provide important resources in personnel, equipment, and intelligence about violent criminals.

                   

The respect for federal agencies among local police, particularly with respect to reducing gun violence, is found nationwide.  The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF), a policing research organization, in 2009 conducted a survey of all local law enforcement agencies serving cities of 100,000 or more regarding their gun violence strategies.

                  

PERF asked the local police to “rate” dozens of gun violence reduction strategies, such as tracing guns found at crime scenes, investigating straw purchases of guns on behalf of convicted felons, deploying gunshot detection technology, targeting violent gangs, removing guns from the scene of domestic violence calls, and providing gun safety education in schools. 

                  

The strategies that involve working with federal law enforcement agencies and federal prosecutors received high approval ratings. In fact, the Number 1 strategy that police chiefs consider most effective in preventing gun violence is submitting cases to the U.S. Attorney for prosecution.  Police chiefs wish that federal prosecutors could handle more gun violence cases resulting from partnerships between local police and federal agents.

                  

A large-scale operation of this kind made headlines in St. Louis in July.  More than 200 people were arrested and 265 firearms were seized in the operation, which involved more than 80 ATF personnel working with St. Louis police and others.

                  

The arrestees had a total of more than 2,300 prior arrests – and yet these people were still on the streets of St. Louis and East St. Louis, armed and dangerous. Because of this joint operation, the arrestees are now facing federal charges with significant penalties. This will make our neighborhoods safer.

                  

Similar results were obtained in the Kansas City area in May, when an operation by ATF and Kansas City Police produced 61 arrests and seizure of 222 firearms. Some of the seized guns had been used in multiple violent crimes, including unsolved homicide investigations. This operation targeted armed career criminals – violent felons who carry guns.

                 

Local police chiefs are grateful for the help we receive from ATF, the FBI, and other federal agencies.  And yet if House Bill 436 were allowed to take effect, instead of thanking federal agents for helping us take violent offenders off the street, our duty would be to arrest the federal agents.   

                  

The outcome of this absurd legislation is that our communities will be less safe if criminals are not prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  Other states recognize the value of partnerships between local police and federal agencies.  If Missouri shuts down these partnerships because of a decision made by legislators, in effect we will be encouraging criminals to come to Missouri.

                  

We urge our legislators to sustain the Governor’s veto of House Bill 436 and allow Missouri’s law enforcement agencies to work with federal agencies. The citizens of Kansas City and St. Louis will be better off for it.

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org 

Department's current form of governance is best

We already are under local control, we’re shielded from political corruption, we use taxpayer dollars in the most efficient way possible, and we are responsive to the community.

I have been Chief of the Kansas City Missouri Police Department since October 2011. I worked here for 26 years before that in a variety of positions and have lived in this city my whole life. Like anyone, I brought my experiences and opinions into each new assignment I’ve had on the police department. However, I always made it a point to keep my mind open in each position and learn as much as I could. I took that same attitude with me into the role of Chief. I have learned a great deal and appreciate all who have taught me.

  

I’ve tried to keep an open mind on one topic in particular: city control of the police department. On the surface, it sounds like a good idea. But the more I learn, the more I come to the realization that the current system of police department governance is the best one. The Mayor has established a commission whose stated mission is to determine what form of governance would be best for the police department. I have remained neutral about the topic as I gathered and analyzed facts, but given what I’ve learned and my extensive experience, I now think it’s time I voice my opinion. The best way to govern the department is our current system: a Board of Police Commissioners operating under state statute. This model best meets the needs of our community.

The KCPD is uniquely governed, and that is not a bad thing. Aside from a period of “home rule” from 1932 to 1939 (you can read more about city politics and the corruption of the police department during that time in this background paper from the Citizens Association of Kansas City), the Kansas City Police Department is controlled by a Board of Police Commissioners. The Missouri Governor appoints the members of this board, and those members are confirmed by the State Senate. Local representatives typically recommend members of the Board to the governor’s office. Board members must be residents of Kansas City, Mo. State statutes – written and voted on by elected representatives and senators – provide the rules the police department must follow. The Kansas City Mayor also has a seat on the Board.

Some people have said the KCPD needs to be under “local control.” If the aforementioned process isn’t local control, I don’t know what is. Local residents are recommended by local representatives elected by the people, chosen by an elected governor and confirmed by local state senators, also elected by Kansas City residents. The mayor – also elected by residents – is a commissioner, as well. Everyone who is in control of the police department lives in Kansas City, Mo.

The issue really in question is city control of the police department, not local control.

I urge you to consider the question, “How would not being governed by state statute improve police services?” According to the Citizens Association of Kansas City, which has hosted public forums on everything from city control of the police department to remodeling Kansas City International Airport, “The Board and Department have functioned as intended, scandal-free for 74 years. Governors of both parties have appointed recognized civic leaders. … The Department is highly regarded nationally, in large part because its board of governance is free from political pressures.”

Coming under city control always has brought with it the concerns of re-opening the door to political corruption within the police department. The current system shields our department from such corruption. Wouldn’t anyone want those charged with enforcing laws to be as free from political influence as possible? Police officers always should be free to do what is best for the safety of the city without fear of repercussion from elected officials. Police should be able to devote their resources to the areas of greatest need as determined by data and community input, not where an elected official requests officers to be for personal or political reasons.

My peers in charge of other major city police departments envy the way KCPD operates. Every election time, their organizations go into limbo. The whole direction of their department could change with the whims of new city council members or mayors, and the chiefs themselves could be ousted. We are fortunate in Kansas City to be able to build our policing strategy on data and best practices. We have the flexibility to meet the changing needs of the community, and I am able to freely express my opinion without fear of reprisal. I ask others to express their opinion on this important matter, as well.

Some have said it is unfair for the city to be required to fund the police department and not have a say in how the money is spent. All city departments, from Fire to Public Works, decide how to allocate their own budgets. The police are no exception. The Board of Police Commissioners annually submits a request for funds to the City Manager, and the manager and City Council ultimately hammer out how much money the Police Department receives. We are as responsible to tax-payers with our money as any other public entity. In fact, I challenge anyone to show a place where we are not responsible with our funds. Feel free to review our budget any time on our web site. We get criticized for taking up 46 percent of the city’s general fund budget. That is a significant amount, but consider that the general fund is only 31 percent of the city’s overall budget. And year after year, the Citizen Satisfaction Survey shows residents want public safety to be the city’s top funding priority.

Proponents of city control say it will save money through consolidation. This isn’t true. If the city currently has enough human resources or information technology staff to handle an additional 2,000 employees (the size of the police department), then they have too many people. The same number of total positions will be required to support the combined number of employees. The department also would lose $1 million annually from the State of Missouri’s Legal Defense Fund through city control. The city would have to take on that responsibility. It also would have to shoulder the cost of the services currently provided by the Missouri Attorney General’s office, which defends civil claims filed against the department and our members. It is difficult to place a dollar figure on these services, but the loss would cost the department and city a substantial sum in attorney’s fees and expenses.

We have a great working relationship with city officials and city departments. Our staff is constantly in communication with them, and we work together on a very regular basis.

Some people say city control would make police more accessible and responsive to residents. I would argue that police are more responsive and accessible to residents than any other segment of city government. Our staff has the most direct contact with citizens in the course of their duties. Officers attend innumerable community meetings, and we have seven officers whose specific assignment is to be a liaison between the community and the department. We have an Office of Community Complaints (also composed of Kansas City residents) that is charged with investigating misconduct of department members, as reported by the public. The OCC answers only to the Board of Police Commissioners, not to me or anyone else on the department. Residents also are welcome to make comments at Board meetings. We make our records as open and transparent as possible. We also are internationally recognized for our community engagement through social media.

Another argument for city control is that we are the only police department governed by a state-appointed board, and being the only one must be bad. Being unique isn’t a negative thing. The New York City Police Department was unique when it started CompStat 20 years ago. Now this data-based policing practice is used all over the nation. Perhaps our form of governance is a model other police departments should follow. Let’s not follow the so-called leader – let’s be the leader. It is good to be unique. My mother taught me from an early age that it’s OK to be different, and in this case, it’s more than OK.

Our form of governance has served the people of Kansas City well for generations. It shields their police from corruption, fosters accountability and provides the most professional service possible. Our department’s model of governance should be perpetuated for generations to come.

Understanding Call Prioritization

We sometimes hear complaints that police don’t respond as quickly as people expect to certain types of incidents. The most common complaints are for calls about burglaries, car break-ins and non-injury accidents. We have a finite number of officers, so we must prioritize calls in which someone’s life or safety is at risk. Our policy very clearly outlines what types of calls receive priority, but here’s a little more succinct version that our dispatchers follow:

Priority 10: Assist the officer, send immediately

Priority 11 – 13: Calls where there is imminent danger to a person’s welfare (always lights and sirens on), send immediately

Priority 20: Calls where there is a potential danger to a person’s welfare (lights and sirens on if the incident is currently in progress), send within 2 minutes

Priority 30: Calls where the quality of the police response may be degraded if there is a delay, send within 5 minutes

Priority 40: Calls where a delay is acceptable

Priority 50: Calls where a delay of up to 4 hours is acceptable

Last month, July 2013, our median response time for Priority 10 calls (encompassing 10-13) was 7.42 minutes, and it was 9.78 minutes for Priority 20 calls. This is the time from the moment a 911 call is received to the moment an officer arrives on scene.

Consider this snapshot in time: at 10:15 a.m. on Tuesday, Aug. 20, there were 13 units (police cars manned by one or two officers) working in the Central Patrol Division. None were free to take any calls. All were tied up, responding to the following: two assaults, two injury crashes, a stabbing, investigating a suspicious person report, meeting an ambulance, meeting with someone who found a child reported missing and transporting an endangered person to a domestic violence shelter. Another had to testify in court. Two calls were in queue waiting to be dispatched whenever an officer became available. One was a 911 hang-up, and the other was a non-residential burglary.

Although it was a Priority 30 call that was to be dispatched within 5 minutes, the burglary caller had been waiting 65 minutes for police to arrive. I understand that person was probably frustrated. I know victims of property crimes often feel violated and scared, but it would be irresponsible for police to respond to their calls for service before a call in which someone’s safety is currently being threatened. It’s not because what happened to the burglary victim is not important, but like any organization, we must manage our resources as efficiently and responsibly as possible.

As we work to continue improving relationships with the community, it’s important that we keep expectations realistic. Police can’t always show up to non-emergency situations as soon as residents prefer, but we do our best to help those who need us most as quickly as possible. 

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org. 

Swearing in the newest KCPD officers

I was honored yesterday to swear in Kansas City's newest police officers. This group will graduate from the Police Academy in a formal ceremony tonight. They'll hit the streets for their first day of work on Sunday.

KC's homicide victims are getting older

The demographics of our city’s homicide victims are shifting this year. To date, Kansas City has had 66 homicides in 2013. Only 25 percent of those victims have been younger than 25. This is very unusual, as young, black men typically comprise the bulk of our homicide victims. Black men still make up 61 percent of this year’s homicide victims, but they’re older. Consider the following statistics from previous years about the percentage of homicide victims who were younger than 25:

•      41% in 2012
•          33% in 2011
•          48% in 2010

You can see the full break down of year-to-date homicide statistics here. I don’t have an explanation for why the city’s homicide victims are getting older, but I do have a little hope. My hope is the younger generation is beginning to turn the corner – that they’re valuing life more and staying away from the high-risk lifestyles that lead to violence. I also hope they’re learning to manage their anger better. Of the known motives for homicide this year and every year, arguments are No. 1.

I ask for the community to continue building up our city’s youth. We’re doing everything we can to reduce violence, but police can’t instill the value of human life in children. That’s up to parents, families, neighbors, and the faith community. Encourage them to solve their problems without guns, and direct them on paths that improve their city. Talk about how important education is. As these pieces fall into place, we will see not just the homicide rate for youth drop, but fewer slayings overall.

You can read more about this trend in this Kansas City Star article from last month.

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org.  

Community relationships, data lead to safer city

Kansas City Police conducted a big crime prevention initiative on Saturday. It involved tactical teams, some of our most advanced equipment and vehicles, and there were children everywhere. You can read the Kansas City Star article about it here. 

Many people may not have seen this community picnic and fair as a crime prevention event, but that is how I viewed it. Because at this picnic at 31^st and Indiana, relationships were forged. People who may never before have felt comfortable approaching a police officer were enjoying watching their children try on tactical gear and climb in our vehicles. They mingled with the many officers who came and brought their families. And those urban-core children are learning to see police as people they can trust and turn to for help.

That is where crime prevention starts: positive relationships between the community and the police. Building those relationships has been the cornerstone of my tenure as police chief. It is something I stress to all KCPD staff and something I bring up at just about every meeting I attend. It’s why I try to get out into the neighborhoods as much as I can. And it’s why I launched the Community Support Division to enhance our outreach and victim support efforts.

We can throw out arrest statistics all day long, but those are reactive numbers. I want the Kansas City Missouri Police Department to work to proactively prevent crime. As I said, trusting relationships between the police and public are the foundation of crime prevention. Smarter policing also can impede criminal activity, and we are increasingly working toward that. Here are some examples of the data-driven strategies we’re undertaking to make Kansas City safer:

         Kansas City No Violence Alliance (KC NoVA) – This partnership between police, prosecutors, Missouri Probation and Parole and the University of Missouri-Kansas City targets those most likely to commit violent crime. It analyzes the networks of people involved in criminal activity, and law enforcement then goes after those at the epicenters. They are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Those on the fringes of the criminal networks are offered social services to turn their lives around. If they choose not to accept the help, they also face prosecution.

         Hot Spot Policing – I began this policing approach soon after I took office. We are allocating extra officers to the areas of the city where we know violent crime is most likely to take place. Putting additional resources in these areas is working.

         Law Enforcement Resource Center – This center features several components – crime analysts, detectives who collect and disperse intelligence information to officers and detectives on the street, crime mapping and more. Read more about it in our Informant newsletter. 

Data informs the majority of our decisions, like where and how to deploy officers and equipment, or who is most likely to commit violent crime.

Police are not saviors. We cannot fix the many societal ills that lead to crime. We are just a piece of the puzzle that includes partners like educators, faith-based organizations, local government, non-profits and businesses. We appreciate the work all these segments of the community do to make this city a safe place to live, work and play. 

We are not the only solution to crime prevention, but we must do everything possible to be of value to the community. We have to use our resources in the most intelligent ways possible. We must get out of our cars and listen to what the public has to say. We need to forge alliances with the law-abiding residents of this city, who are the vast majority. We should let the community know they can trust us and come to us with problems or information about crime. I have been working on these relationships from Day 1 and will continue to do so. I’m trying to make it the priority of every member of this department. Whether that takes the form of talking to neighbors at a shooting scene or inviting children to take a peek inside our armored vehicles, all of these interactions are valuable and forge the path to a safer community.

Send comments to kcpdchiefblog@kcpd.org