Memo: APD Response to the Joint Report on Racial Profiling

LUSTIN
POLICE
TEXAS
MEMORANDUM
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief of Police
To:
City Council Judicial Committee
From:
Brian Manley, Chief of Police
Date:
May 7, 2020
Subject:
Follow-Up Information - Judicial Committee Meeting Presentation - February 10, 2020
The City Council Judicial Committee received a presentation on February 10, 2020, regarding the Joint
Report: Analysis of APD Racial Profiling Data authored by the Office of Police Oversight, the Equity
Office, and the Office of Innovation. During the presentation, questions arose regarding the reason for the
traffic stops that led to the arrests covered in the report. The authors of that report submitted a memorandum
to you on March 27, 2020, in response to your question; however, the information included in their response
was incomplete.
In discussing the role warrants played in the arrests from traffic stops, their memorandum only included
those stops where there was pre-existing knowledge of a warrant for arrest. Their memorandum did not
include the stops where the warrant was discovered during the post-stop investigation. The purpose of this
memorandum is to provide you with more complete information SO you are appropriately informed as we
continue to discuss the report and next steps.
Reason for Arrest
Total Arrests # Results Excluded from TCOLE form
Violation of Penal Code
6,587
35 Middle Eastern and 15 Unknown
Moving Traffic Violation (reason for stop)
4,610
28 Middle Eastern and 8 Unknown
Violation of law other than traffic (reason for stop)
1,977
7 Middle Eastern and 7 Unknown
Violation of Traffic Law
1,471
3 Middle Eastern and 2 Unknown
Moving Traffic Violation (reason for stop)
1,291
2 Middle Eastern and 2 Unknown
Violation of law other than traffic (reason for stop)
180
1 Middle Eastern
Violation of City Ordinance
9
(none)
Moving Traffic Violation (reason for stop)
3
Violation of law other than traffic (reason for stop)
6
Outstanding Warrant *
3,147
6 Middle Eastern and 11 Unknown
Moving Traffic Violation (reason for stop)
2,289
5 Middle Eastern and 9 Unknown
Pre-existing knowledge (i.e. warrant) (reason for stop)
361
2 Unknown
Violation of law other than traffic (reason for stop)
497
1 Middle Eastern
Grand Total
11,214
44 Middle Eastern and 28 Unknown
The data in the table above encompasses the same 2018 data set of 11,214 traffic stops resulting in an arrest
that was analyzed in the Joint Report. The data shows that 28% of arrests from traffic stops in 2018 were
the result of a warrant for arrest (both pre-existing knowledge of the warrant and stops where the warrant
was discovered during post-stop investigation).
The table below outlines the proportionality of those 3,147 warrant arrests by race:
HISPANIC
MIDDLE
Grand
Stop based on
ASIAN
BLACK
HAWAIIAN
UNKNOWN
WHITE
OR LATINO
EASTERN
Total
Moving Traffic Violation
10
771
1
1,021
5
9
472
2,289
Pre-existing knowledge
2
133
0
151
0
2
73
361
(i.e. warrant)
Violation of law other
1
133
0
212
1
0
150
497
than traffic
Grand Total
13
1,037
1
1,384
6
11
695
3,147
While this data alone does not allow us to determine what percentage of the overall disparities can be
attributed to the lack of officer discretion across all enforcement action decisions (e.g. non-warrant
arrests,
citations) it also does not support the statement in the Joint Report memorandum, "Therefore, only an
extremely limited part of the disproportionality of motor vehicle stops leading to arrests can be attributed
to warrants for any race". The data does show disproportionality among those stopped that were found to
have a warrant for arrest. Specifically, 33% of those arrested for warrants in traffic stops were Black/African
American, 44% were Hispanic, and 22% were White/Caucasian. These arrests do not represent instances
where an officer's discretion led to disproportionate outcomes.
Additional analysis also shows that 59% of the arrests from traffic stops resulted from violations of the
Penal Code while only 13% were arrested solely for a traffic violation. We are working to analyze those
arrested during a traffic stop for violations of the Penal Code and breakdown by race and most frequent
offenses charged. I will reiterate what I stated to you at the February 10, 2020 meeting of the City Council
Judicial Committee:
We absolutely understand and were not surprised to see that disparities exist but to dig
deeper. And when we look at the disparity that shows that, whether it be African
Americans or Hispanics are arrested at a higher rate when it comes to traffic stops, that
doesn't necessarily indicate that that was a discretionary decision that the officer made.
We need to dig deeper and find out how many of those arrests were based on warrants
VS. how many of those were at the officer's discretion. / am not suggesting that that is
going to do away with the disparity, but that is going to put the disparity in better context.
You are aware of the many steps we have already taken to address fair and impartial policing, racial equity,
and cultural competence. Additionally, I am working to identify ways we can further analyze our data to
better understand the reasons behind the disproportionalities in outcomes, and I stand ready to act
immediately if any are caused by partiality on the part of our officers.
Cc: Spencer Cronk, City Manager
Rey Arellano, Assistant City Manager
Farah Muscadin, Police Oversight Director
OF
GAY
CESTIME
FOUNDED
MEMORANDUM
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief
TO:
City Council Judicial Committee
FROM:
Brian Manley, Chief of Police
DATE:
April 23, 2020
SUBJECT:
Response to the Joint Report on Racial Profiling Data
In January 2020, the Office of Police Oversight, Office of Innovation, and Equity Office released a Joint
Report on the Austin Police Department's (APD) traffic stop data ranging from 2015-2018. APD
subsequently issued a response to the report, dated January 14, 2020 (see attachment), which was
released to the Public Safety Commission and the media.
The purpose of this memorandum is to provide responses to the 14 recommendations outlined in the
joint report, as requested by the members of the Judicial Committee during its meeting on February 10,
2020. The Department's initial response, as well as the studies and reports referenced therein, provides
additional context to this memorandum.
Recommendation 1: Acknowledge that racial disparity exists and is worsening
The Austin Police Department consistently and unequivocally acknowledges that racial
disparities exist throughout aspects of our city, including police enforcement actions.
Accordingly, the Department has readily taken many steps to address the disparities
within APD's purview over the past five years, as detailed in the January 14, 2020
response. Racial disparities have persisted despite these efforts, and the widening of
certain gaps has raised additional concerns that demand further attention and analysis.
Recommendation 2: Acknowledge that the methodology previously used omitted the context of
proportionality and therefore was an incomplete analysis. This resulted in a perception that a
trend of disparity did not exist.
The primary purpose of APD's annual racial profiling report is to comply with state
legislative mandates that require the reporting of specific data. Proportionality
assessments are not compulsory. However, recognizing the importance of such
information, APD collaborated with the Center for Policing Equity to conduct a
comprehensive analysis of the racial disparities manifested in the Department's
enforcement actions. The report was the first to apply the National Justice Database's
independent analytic framework to police data made available through President
Obama's Police Data Initiative, Measuring Fairness in the Austin Police Department. That
report is posted alongside the Department's racial profiling reports on the City's website.
Recommendation 3: Acknowledge that race plays a major role in who we stop, search, and for
whom we use discretion favorably.
The Department acknowledges that the outcomes of many police activities result in racial
disparities. Additional data and analysis is necessary to determine how officer discretion,
Departmental procedures, and societal factors contribute to these disproportionalities
Recommendation 4: To gain community trust, proportional racial disparity in motor vehicle stops,
arrests, searches, field observations, warnings, and citations should be zero.
The Department is committed to reducing racial disparities to zero, particularly disparities
that are the result of officer discretion.
Recommendation 5: The official comprehensive analysis of racial profiling shall be conducted and
released by the City of Austin Office of Police Oversight, although state-mandated reporting may
continue under the purview of the Chief.
The Department will continue to release its state-mandated racial profiling report on an
annual basis and welcomes the Office of Police Oversight's independent analysis and
insight, in the manner the City Manager deems necessary and appropriate.
Recommendation 6: In order to uphold data integrity, accuracy, and transparency, officers should
verify the racial and ethnic identity with people they stop. The verified data should be documented
in officer reports and be published in the Racial Profiling data sets on the City's Open Data Portal.
In accordance with departmental procedures, Officers are required to document the race
and ethnicity of the individuals they stop. The City has contracted with Dr. Alex Del
Carmen, an expert on racial profiling and discrimination, to regularly audit the
Department's racial profiling data to ensure accuracy in data collection and reporting. The
traffic stop data, which includes race, is published in the racial profiling datasets on the
City's Open Data Portal.
Recommendation 7: Analyze and report on the operational inefficiencies and costs that
disproportionate racial disparities create by the second quarter of the fiscal year 2020 and provide
to the City Manager and Council.
Currently, the Department is not staffed or equipped to quantify and analyze this data
but would readily collaborate with the City Auditor's office or another entity, at the
direction of the City Manager.
Recommendation 8: Explore promising practices from Oakland and Nashville that use a scoring
mechanism for disproportional behavior to identify at-risk officers and assign appropriate
interventions and use in the determination of promotions.
The Department agrees the City should invest in sophisticated oversight tools that are
more adept at identifying, flagging, and tracking at-risk officers in order to facilitate timely
and effective interventions.
Recommendation 9: Include implicit bias testing in the Austin Police Department hiring process.
Based on the best available evidence from subject-matter experts on bias, the
Department operates with the understanding that every applicant will have implicit
biases. Therefore, the Department administers training to ensure all employees are aware
of their biases, promulgates explicit policies to set clear expectations that bias-based
actions are intolerable, and utilizes oversight mechanisms to identify inappropriate
behavior.
Recommendation 10: For current employees, require implicit bias testing and flag high-scoring
officers for appropriate intervention.
As stated above, the Department has mechanisms in place to identify and rectify
inappropriate behavior. Additionally, the Department is open to exploring proven,
evidence-based testing methods that are capable of effectively supplementing current
training, policies, procedures, and audits.
Recommendation 11: Identify and implement bias-countering policies, practices, methods,
processes, and standard operating procedures to mitigate bias.
The Department recommends the City contract with a suitable academic institution to
conduct an independent, comprehensive, and evidence-informed assessment of the
Department's enforcement practices, cultural norms and customs, training,
accountability procedures, and any resulting racial disparities. A similar partnership
between the City of Oakland and Stanford University yielded promising results and
provided a roadmap for creating community-based strategies aimed at addressing the
unique historical and cultural challenges of a particular city: Data for Change & Strategies
for Change.
Recommendations 12: Include the comprehensive Racial History of Policing curriculum in the
cadet training academy and adapt it into required training for existing officers, at all ranks,
annually.
The Department intends to incorporate the Racial History of Policing training in future
cadet classes and is determining the best approach and frequency for administering the
training to existing officers.
Recommendation 13: Follow the guidelines for racial equity training established by the Equity
Office. The Equity Office and Office of Police Oversight shall be consulted for final selection of
official racial equity training for officers at all ranks.
The Department is committed to following the established guidelines for racial equity
training and welcomes input from the Equity Office and Office of Police Oversight.
Recommendation 14: Develop a method to provide racial equity training on an ongoing basis (a
minimum of 40 hours per year) for all staff, sworn and civilian, in the department, annually, during
every year of service.
The Department is eager to provide additional racial equity training for all employees in
an effective, feasible, and sustainable manner. The Department will consider this
recommendation as part of the FY21 budget process.
CC: Spencer Cronk, City Manager
Rey Arellano, Assistant City Manager
Farah Muscadin, Office of Police Oversight
Brion Oaks, Equity Office
Kerry O'Connor, Office of Innovation
Attachment: APD Response to Joint Report
OF
DAY
FOUNDED
MEMORANDUM
Austin Police Department
Office of the Chief
TO:
Spencer Cronk, City Manager
CC:
Rey Arellano, Assistant City Manager
FROM:
Brian Manley, Chief of Police
DATE:
January 14, 2020
SUBJECT:
APD's Response to the Joint Report on Racial Profiling Data
The collective voice of the Office of Police Oversight, Office of Innovation, and Equity Office is a welcome
addition to the ongoing conversation focused on redressing racial inequities in Austin. Their joint report
on the Austin Police Department's traffic stop data represents another brick in the path toward inclusive
diversity and equality for the citizens of this city, and it has given our Department a valuable opportunity
to view the issue from an alternative perspective. Strong inter-agency partnerships and collaboration are
essential prerequisites for ameliorating the inequalities that have beset our city since it was established.
The Austin Police Department has consistently and unequivocally acknowledged that racial disparities are
prevalent throughout many aspects of our city, including police enforcement actions. Accordingly, the
Department has readily taken the following steps to address the disparities within our purview over the
past five years:
Collaborated with the Center for Policing Equity to conduct a comprehensive analysis of
the racial disparities manifested in the Department's enforcement actions. The report
was the first to apply the National Justice Database's independent analytic framework to
police data made available through President Obama's Police Data Initiative: Measuring
Fairness in the Austin Police Department
Embraced transparency by publishing enforcement data in the City's open data portal: All
Data & Curated Datasets
Published annual racial profiling and use of force reports: Racial Profiling & Response to
Resistance
Instituted implicit bias training for all sworn personnel and new recruits
Implemented more robust accountability mechanisms and worked with the Office of the
City Auditor to improve the effectiveness of those nascent processes: Body-Worn Camera
Audit
Contracted with Dr. Alex Del Carmen, an expert on racial profiling and discrimination, to
regularly audit the Department's racial profiling data to ensure accuracy in collection and
reporting
Hired a Development and Training Manager with a doctorate in psychology and expertise
in cross-cultural perspectives to develop and execute curriculum review strategies and
assess teaching and learning methodology at the Training Academy: Statesman Editorial
Partnered with community stakeholders and justice advocates to enact critical policy
changes pertaining to use of force and de-escalation, traffic enforcement, and
interactions with foreign nationals: APD General Orders
Reduced discretionary arrests for citation-eligible offenses from 1,557 in 2017 to 252
through the first three quarters of 2019. Arrests of Black individuals dropped from 477 to
70 during that time period. The Department also holds a monthly working group with
community members to explore additional strategies for addressing disparities in
enforcement actions. The results are published quarterly on the City's website: Freedom
City Reports
Streamlined the process to gather feedback from the community about interactions with
our officers, both positive and negative: Office of Police Oversight
Focused on increasing diversity and advancing community policing and engagement
through recruiting, cadet training, continuing education, and retention practices: Matrix
Report
Worked with the City's Equity Office to develop a forthcoming Equity Assessment Tool to
evaluate the impact of existing City/Department policies on racial equity, with the goal of
utilizing the tool to implement new policies, practices, and programs to help identify and
address the inequities that impact the quality of life for low-income communities, which
are disproportionately communities of color: Equity Assessment Tool (Pilot)
Despite all of these efforts, disparities have persisted. The Department is eager to achieve more
substantive progress and believes the Department, City leaders, and community can work together to
reach this goal through the following actions:
Move beyond the reliance on Census population data as the sole benchmark for analyzing
racial disparities in police enforcement actions. Policy makers, the public, and members
of the media have increasingly adopted this expedient comparison point because it is
simple, fast, and easy to understand. However, due to the confluence of complex factors
that contribute to disparate outcomes, researchers and scholars have widely dismissed
the utilization of population data, by itself, as an effective basis for making incisive and
meaningful interpretations of racial profiling data¹. Failure to adequately address the
complexities of the issue can mislead the public and policy makers about the various
causes of the disparities and result in the adoption of ineffective or inappropriate
1
Sample works (with additional references cited within each respective source): Methods for Assessing Racially Biased Policing (Ridgeway and
MacDonald); Toward a Better Benchmark (Alpert, Smith, and Dunham); Data for Change (Hetey, Monin, Maitreyi, and Eberhardt); Testing for
Racial Profiling in Traffic Stops From Behind a Veil of Darkness (Grogger and Ridgeway)
corrective measures. This is especially vital for a city with a history of systematically
segregating its citizens of color, stifling their economic mobility, and neglecting to protect
them from the onslaught of urban renewal and gentrification: Mayor's Task Force on
Institutional Racism and Systemic Inequities
Contract with a suitable academic institution to conduct an independent, comprehensive,
and evidence-informed assessment of the Department's enforcement practices, cultural
norms and customs, training, accountability procedures, and any resulting racial
disparities. A similar partnership between the City of Oakland and Stanford University
yielded promising results and provided a roadmap for creating community-based
strategies aimed at addressing the unique historical and cultural challenges of a particular
city: Data for Change & Strategies for Change
As recommended in the Joint Report, invest in sophisticated oversight tools that are more
adept at identifying, flagging, and tracking at-risk officers in order to facilitate timely and
effective interventions: Risk Management Systems
Brian Manley
Chief of Police