Traffic tickets, race and the facts

The Kansas City Star recently published an article and editorial about the racial breakdown in traffic tickets in Kansas City, Mo. First and foremost, I want to be clear that we welcome public scrutiny. We want to hear from the people we serve about what they think we’re doing well and what we can improve upon. We’re also constantly analyzing data to see where we need improvement, additional training and/or amendments to our policies and procedures.

Numerically, whites received more traffic tickets in 2017 in Kansas City, Mo. But proportional to their population, yes, African-Americans received more tickets. That’s something we continually evaluate and use that analysis to deploy our resources. This disparity is not just an issue with Kansas City but with police departments around the country.

In their story, The Star sorted their ticket data by the zip code of where the person receiving the ticket lives, not where the tickets were issued. The zip code of where the ticket is issued is not recorded on most police citations – just the address – so they can’t be sorted that way. (So we could issue a ticket to someone by KCI who lives in the 64130 zip code, but we wouldn’t know that at the time of the stop.) We’re not sure of the methodology the Star reporters used to analyze the data in their Sunday article, but I would be happy to share our data on tickets issued by race in 2017. This was pulled from our e-ticketing system:

Total citations: 115,134

Tickets by race
African-American – 41,961
White – 43,801
American Indian or Alaskan Native – 66
Asian or Pacific Islander – 758
Unknown – 2,074

The remaining 26,474 tickets were parking tickets. When those are issued, we don’t know the race of the person receiving the ticket.

KCPD also captures data about whether officers knew the race of the driver prior to stopping a car. This is not required data, but we think it’s important. Our data shows that officers did not know the race of the driver they had stopped when they pulled the vehicle over 98.6 percent of the time. Think about it – an officer clocks a car speeding from a quarter-mile away – he or she has no chance to see the driver.

Even so, we would expect higher ticket numbers to be issued in the areas of the urban core most impacted by violent crime in 2017. Interim Chief David Zimmerman deployed Traffic Enforcement crews to several zones along the Prospect Avenue Corridor to combat spiking violent crime, homicides and traffic fatalities. We experienced 99 traffic fatalities in 2017, the most since 1980. Interim Chief Zimmerman explained this in a blog at the time we started the initiative. The zones were determined by a well-known intelligence-led policing strategy called DDACTS – Data-Driven Approach to Crime and Traffic Safety. Those zones were in the zip codes cited in the Star’s article as having the highest numbers of residents receiving tickets. We would expect them to because we increased police presence there to combat violent crime and make it safer for residents. More officers in the area led to more officers to see traffic violations. (Traffic fatalities are at 25 year-to-date, compared to 34 at this time last year.)

It’s something of a Catch-22. With violent crime spiking, police were accused of not doing enough. Then we deployed extra resources to areas experiencing the most violence, and now we’re accused of “over-policing,” as you’ll see in inquiries from the Star reporter below.

One thing to keep in mind is that the Municipal Court data cited in the Star's article is not the same as stop data. We rely on the stop data we compile for the Missouri Attorney General to help us identify any potential bias and to address it in our training. That actually shows us how many drivers of every race we pull over. Our 2017 stop data will post on the Attorney General’s web site no later than June 1. Feel free to check out our 2016 data. Our disparity index for African-Americans is lower than the rest of the state. We continually review this rate against other departments and against our own department over prior years.

Despite the Star article’s focus on the fines and warrants that arise from Municipal Court, there was no description of Municipal/Traffic Court procedures, no statement from a judge, and no comment from a neutral attorney or public defender. There was no mention of the Court’s warrant amnesty days, payment plans, or diversion opportunities. Much can be resolved simply by residents showing up to court. I highly encourage anyone struggling with traffic fines and warrants to contact the court to see how the issues can be resolved.

Finally, I’d like to address how this article played out from our end, and why the Star’s statement that we provided no comment is false.

The Star first contacted Media Unit commander and public information officer Captain Lionel Colón by e-mail at 4:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 15. The reporter stated they’d gotten statistics (they did not say from where), and then asked these questions:

“1. Why are African Americans being assigned tickets at such a disproportionate rate?
2. Why does the 64130 zip code account for such a disproportionate amount of tickets?
3. Some have interpreted this data as demonstrating a pattern of ‘over-policing’ and targeting of AA motorists by the KCPD. What is the department's response to that?”

Captain Colón responded early the next morning asking what the data were so we could review it in order to properly answer their questions. The Star declined to provide the data, other than directing us to public information from Municipal Court. They refused to say with whom they worked at Municipal Court to obtain the data or what kind of dataset they’d requested. Captain Colón said it would be irresponsible for him to speak to the data without seeing it.

Over the next few days, we worked to try to extract our own ticket data from 2017 by race and set up an appointment with leaders at Municipal Court to compare. Captain Colón maintained daily e-mail contact with the Star during that time.

On Friday, May 18, we told the reporter that since we could not see the data the Star used to make responsible and informed comments, we were working to pull the data ourselves. We told him there were several other large-scale public information requests that had been submitted previously from other organizations that – to be fair to everyone – needed to be addressed first. The reporter responded that it was too late, anyway, and the article would run on Sunday. The Star then reported that KCPD declined to comment, which is false. We requested the Star correct their statement, “Police did not respond to the Star’s request for comments to this article,” and they declined. Daily e-mail conversation between KCPD and reporters and editors is not a “no comment” situation. “No comment” is not a response that we give. Sometimes we have to protect the integrity of an investigation and can’t say much, and other times – as is the case here – we need more time to review a large amount of information (that wasn’t even made available to us for review). Just to pull that information ourselves took more time than the Star allotted us for making a statement on it.

In summary, the Star reporters gave the police department 2.5 days to respond to reams of data they wouldn’t show us. Members of the Star have had the opportunity to review this data since February 2018, according to Municipal Court.

Again, we welcome scrutiny. We are accountable to the people of Kansas City. Some examples of how we hold ourselves accountable are the racial stop data we provide to the Missouri Attorney General and the monthly reports on crime and police activity we deliver publicly to the Board of Police Commissioners. We are obliged to provide fair police service to everyone, and we strive to do that every day. We also have an obligation and responsibility to address crime and provide public safety, which includes enforcement. So we welcome scrutiny, but the KCPD and the people of Kansas City deserve to have an authentic and informed discussion on this topic. 

Send comments to [email protected]. 

Officers are impacted by shootings, too

We’ve seen several news reports lately of what first responders to the San Bernardino shootings experienced when confronting active shooters last week. That’s made me think about those officers and what they must be going through one week later. This was certainly a different circumstance than most officer-involved shootings. No one has questioned that they were justified in shooting the suspects. And the subsequent media coverage that followed has been unusual, as well, exploring what the officers went through. Usually when an officer fatally shoots someone, we hear about the person who died. The media shows the deceased's family and the grief they are suffering. And they are suffering. They have lost a loved one. No matter the circumstances, that loss is painful. But beyond their identifying information and the debate over whether what they did was justified, we don’t usually hear much about the officers – about what they’re going through after such an incident. I realize many would say, “It can’t be that bad. They’re still alive.” Yes, but many of them are forever changed. Their careers and families can be ruined. Some even take their own lives.

All officers involved in fatal shootings on our department must see a psychologist afterward to determine what, if any, assistance they need in the short or long term to cope with the trauma. I spoke with our licensed psychologist recently, Kay White, and she said the impact these incidents have on officers runs the gamut. But one thing she said they all have in common is that not one officer has ever indicated he or she was pleased about or satisfied with having killed another person. As I mentioned in my last post, no officer wants to take the life of another human being. But sometimes, we must. Below is a video we released of an officer-involved shooting six years ago in a South Kansas City park. You’ll see that it’s from two different angles. The officers saw the man strike a vehicle and flee. He drove off-road, and this is what happened (warning - the linked video contains disturbing images):

Ms. White told me the impact a fatal shooting has on an officer depends on several factors, but large among them are community support and media portrayals. If the public tends to stand behind the officer, that officer tends to suffer less psychologically. But Ms. White said she’s seeing more and more officers who are worried about the litigation involved with protecting themselves and/or others, and what impact possible litigation could have on their family, the department and the community.

Even for officers against whom there has been no public outcry, being forced to shoot someone can be incredibly traumatic. One of our officers was brave enough to tell his story publicly, so others would know they were not alone. This officer was one of three who responded to a man calling 911 last year who said he “had a psychotic urge to kill people.” Officers did everything they could to diffuse the situation, but when the man came out of his house and pointed a gun at one of them, they had to protect themselves, and all of them fired. The suspect died. A subsequent search of the man’s house revealed five loaded long-guns with large amounts of ammunition on the kitchen table and a note indicating the man intended to have a protracted gun battle with police officers. Prosecutors cleared all the officers of any violations of law. Still, one of them couldn’t sleep. He replayed the incident over and over in his mind. He stopped leaving his house. His wife and children didn’t know what to do to help him. He is now receiving the treatment he needs and has played a significant role in implementing mental wellness initiatives on our department.

Indeed, our psychologist said one of the primary physical symptoms she sees among officers involved in shootings is the inability to sleep. They have bad dreams. They can’t stop thinking about and replaying the situation. Adrenaline is pumping in them all the time, so they can never rest. They become socially withdrawn, anxious, irritable and afraid to go to work. They feel like no one understands what they’re going through. They don’t feel like they can tell anyone about their depression because they think it would be unacceptable in a law enforcement environment. I have seen too many of our officers who were medically retired because of mental health issues following a traumatic event. Sometimes that’s not a shooting. Sometimes it’s working the case of a murdered child or something equally horrific. Our department is working to ensure these officers are taken care of and given the time they need to recover emotionally before we send them back out on the streets. 

And it’s not just the officers who are impacted. Their families suffer, too. Ms. White said many family members will look at the officer differently after the event, or want the officer to quit his or her job because it’s too dangerous. Others want to “fix” the officer so he or she is like the loved one they knew before.

Pressure on family members even affects loved ones of officers NOT involved in shootings. After the officer-involved shooting in Ferguson, Mo., last year, the teenage daughter of one of our officers wrote a private message to our department’s Facebook page saying she was being bullied at school because her father was a police officer. She said she knew the danger he put himself in daily, even to protect people like the bullies, and she just wanted us to know she was very proud of him. And the family members of one of our sergeants who just happens to be named Darrin Wilson (the same name as the officer in the Ferguson shooting, but spelled differently) received death threats. (KCPD’s Sgt. Darrin Wilson, for the record, just won a Gold Award for Valor from the Metro Chiefs and Sheriffs Association for working with another officer – both of whom were off duty at the time – to stop a man who robbed a bank in a downtown office tower in January, planted a live bomb in the bank and then carjacked several people. That man pleaded guilty to federal charges of bank robbery and carjacking on Nov. 19 and is awaiting sentencing.) 

As you can see, the effects on officers from officer-involved shootings are widespread and varied. For many, that split-second decision in which they did what they were trained to do to protect themselves and others is life-changing. They may not have lost their lives, but some will never be the same.

Send comments to [email protected]. 

Media coverage of police influences public perception

Soon you will see newspaper and television stories about officer-involved shootings in Kansas City. They likely will feature emotional statements from loved ones saying they wish the shootings never had to happen. Those of us in law enforcement wish the same thing. The very last thing any officer wants to do is take the life of another person. Everyone misses a loved one when they are gone. Because of this, I understand that the family and friends of those left behind are grieving and questioning the necessity of it all.

But when a life-threatening situation presents itself, officers cannot act on what they would like to happen. They don’t have that luxury. They must act on the facts as they know them at the time and take what actions are necessary and legal to protect themselves and others. And unlike the extensive analysis of the incident that so-called “experts” on 24-hour news stations can conduct in the aftermath, officers usually do not have the luxury of time as an incident unfolds. They have fractions of a second to determine whether someone is presenting a threat to their life or the life of another.

We have seen what irresponsible reporting by the media can do. While protests over the death of a man in police custody raged in Baltimore in May, a national news network reported that Baltimore police had shot and killed a protester, nearly inciting another riot. That was not at all true. Police instead arrested a man with a gun. The network retracted the report. But not before it already increased unrest and police distrust in the city. Once the relationship between the community and police is damaged, it may take years to repair it.

Most news organizations – local or national – are not so reckless as to report complete falsehoods. But presenting emotion-heavy stories, out-of-context videos and putting “experts” on television or in print who don’t know all of the facts of an incident is a disservice to everyone. Police investigations of officer-involved shootings are based on facts. Trained detectives with years of experience in criminal investigations determine the facts of the case. Those facts and findings are then presented to a prosecutor for a determination of whether police acted within the law. Emotions cannot be a factor in conducting a fair and unbiased investigation, and the public should expect no less. And as the Department does with any other criminal investigation, once an officer-involved shooting investigation is closed, the case file is made public, in accordance with the Missouri Sunshine Law.

Fostering distrust between police and the community is a reckless thing to do. Everyone’s safety is put at risk when communities lack the trust to work together to fight violence. We have seen violence spike in recent years in communities where residents don’t have a good relationship with law enforcement. I blogged about that earlier this year. I have worked my entire career here at KCPD to build trust between the department and residents, and it has been one of my top priorities as Chief of Police. And from the feedback I’ve gotten, we’re making real strides.

I’m not saying that we are perfect. If one of the 2,000 members of this department violates policy or the law, we want to know about it, and we will work to correct it as quickly as possible. We have proved as much by taking such allegations seriously. For example, the Office of Community Complaints – an independent civilian oversight organization – was one of the first civilian oversight offices for law enforcement to be established in this country. When a KCPD member has violated the law or department policy, he or she will be held accountable.

But we invest heavily in training to avoid such violations of the law or department policy in the first place. From one call to the next, our officers must be social workers, paramedics or conflict mediators, and we try to prepare them for every situation they may face. Our officers are well-versed in everything from responding to an active shooter to city ordinances.

A city where law enforcement and other community members work together and trust each other is a safer community. It’s a place where people feel free to come to police with their fears or to provide information to capture someone who has committed violence in their neighborhood. Propagating stories to get ratings or readers that rely solely on emotion, or out-of-context snippets undermines that relationship, and ultimately undermines the safety of the city.

Reflecting on my third anniversary as Chief of Police

Over the past three years, I have had the pleasure of leading an organization filled with talented, dedicated, compassionate and professional employees. Since being appointed chief of police on October 13, 2011, I have experienced a tremendous amount of personal and professional growth thanks to many. 

Both my immediate and extended family have been nothing but supportive and encouraging during my entire 29 years of employment with the Kansas City Missouri Police Department.  I am so blessed and appreciative to have them in my life. Same goes for my few close groups of friends who look out for my well-being, several of whom contact me daily.   

My faith-based supporters are very much appreciated as they have prayed for me regularly as well as remind me that I work for God and not for man.  Oftentimes I have made decisions that others question, which I encourage and welcome, but please know that I pray before making most major decisions and will follow the guidance of my heavenly Father. Thus far, when I have listened to him, many crises have been averted.

What I am most encouraged about during my tenure as chief is the reduction in the number of homicides in Kansas City. The reduction in the number of homicides committed this year is unparalleled during the past five decades. The credit for the reduction is only in part due to the efforts of the police department. Many organizations, programs and individuals are contributing to making our city safer than it has been for decades. Oftentimes when I respond to homicide scenes, I observe witnesses openly sharing information with detectives. Many are willing to respond to Police Headquarters to provide formal statements.

Even media coverage of violent crimes has diminished. My observations over the past 18 months have revealed less doomsday coverage from some of the local media outlets. During a brief period of my tenure as chief, I and others noticed an increase in negative coverage, even when there had been no increase in violent crimes.  Responsible reporting has, without a doubt, contributed to increasing the feelings of safety in some parts of our community. People tend to want to get involved more when they feel as though the situation is not hopeless.

We should not become complacent, nor should we claim victory. There is no cause to celebrate the still too-high number of senseless acts of violence in our city. We must continue to work together to make the greater metropolitan area one of the safest areas in the country.

What I am currently most concerned about is the police department’s inability to attract and retain qualified minority police officers. The number of minority police officers has increased during my tenure as chief, but not to a level where I am satisfied. Institutional racism exists within many organizations, and law enforcement is not exempt. I have noticed that many who broach the subject of recruiting have done little to contribute to solving the problem, but they often espouse to have the solutions for others to implement. The entire community should be responsible for recruiting police officers who can best serve our community. Weekly, in the national spotlight, we hear of negative race-related issues between the police and other segments of the community. These issues are real!  The community has made it clear that increased minority representation is needed. I implore the entire community to get involved. Ask yourself this question, “How might I contribute to increasing diversity?”  You can share your ideas/concerns at Attorney General Koster’s Roundtable on Tuesday, October 14, from 9 to 11 a.m. in the theater of the Student Union building on the campus of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, 5100 Cherry Street. Several local chiefs of police also will be meeting on Tuesday, at another location, to discuss minority recruitment and other issues. Rest assured that I will continue to keep this issue on the forefront of my agenda. (And FYI, I prayed before I drafted this paragraph.)

Organizational and cultural changes in the police department have been a continuous process and are necessary to gain and nurture community trust. Problem solving will continue to be viewed as a shared responsibility between the police and other segments of the community.

We will continue to practice fiscal discipline throughout the department to ensure continued financial viability and to increase efficiency, avoid periods of stagnation, continue to reach out to the community en masse through social media and by other means, incorporate emerging technologies in our day-to-day operations and to provide high-quality services in a customer-friendly manner.

Last, but certainly not least, I want to thank the Board of Police Commissioners for allowing me to serve our community.  

Please know that I will continue to do what is in the best interest of the entire community and have no plans to retire any time soon. I am often asked how long will I serve as chief and if I have a contract. I will serve until I accomplish what I have set out to accomplish and no, I do not have a contract. By state statute I must retire at age 65. I am 52 years old, so I have almost 13 years of eligibility.

Thanks again to all who have contributed to making my dreams come true!

Send comments to [email protected].