In 2016, the D.C. Council unanimously passed what came to be known as the NEAR Act, a police reform measure meant to increase data collection and transparency in the hopes of creating more accountability.
The effort was about addressing violent crime at the root cause, similar to how matters of public health are addressed. By increasing community involvement, the hope was to create a more responsive and trusted city police force.
The second audit of the measure was released Thursday, and it examines the ways that massive reform effort was implemented — both the good and the bad.
“One of the overall themes … there’s still a lot more the District can be doing in terms of crime fighting, mitigation, policies, prevention and so forth,” said D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson.
She said it’s become clear that the executive branch and D.C. police have been slow to embrace and comply with certain aspects of the law.
Patterson pointed to two community policing groups that were created, but never really got off the ground.
“One was supposed to be an ongoing community organization looking at community policing, looking at best practices nationally, what would work best in the District, but really calling on members of the community to work with the government, with the police department,” said Patterson.
But the report found “MPD’s compliance with the Community Policing Working Group requirements has declined over time. MPD released the first working group report in July 2017 and issued the second report in December 2019, five months late. MPD has not published a third working group report, which was due on July 1, 2021, nor has it published the next report, which was due on July 1, 2023.”
The report cites former members of that group who complained that it became a department-led entity, as opposed to one led by city residents.
Another group created under the law, the Comprehensive Homicide Elimination Strategy Task Force, or CHEST, never submitted its final report, either. In fact, that group had difficulty gathering a quorum to conduct official business.
“The quorum problem became self-perpetuating, because members did not see value in participating when others did not seem engaged and the group could not take official action. One member stated that the quorum issue ‘made it difficult to get any momentum’ and another stated that CHEST ‘spinned their wheels at the beginning,'” the report said.
“Every once in a while, you’ll find, I think, in this administration, or just about any administration, a sort of ‘we know best’ attitude that may resist paying attention, first, to the council, and, second, to the broader community,” Patterson said. “And that’s something that I think we need to continually work on.”
Patterson went on to say the department has not used community input in the way the reform measure intended.
Parts of the NEAR Act have proved successful, though, Patterson said. The law narrowed and clarified the definition of what it means to “assault a police officer.” She said once that was better defined, the number of arrests dropped substantially. She also said the department has done a better job of collecting data from traffic stops, though that’s not the same as actually using the data to learn from it.
“What’s implied in the legislation, what’s intended in the legislation, is that the department use that data, evaluate that data, and figure out, ‘Is there a better way to be doing any of what it is that we are doing?'” Patterson said.
According to the report, “The challenge is to use the data to increase understanding of whether stops are achieving public safety objectives and are being implemented fairly in D.C., and to build community trust through improved transparency and dialogue about police practices. The results of that analysis, in turn, can influence changes in police tactics, policies, and training.”
In all, the report is more than 100 pages and makes 14 recommendations that touch on several areas. Afterward, the mayor’s office indicated it was in agreement with most of what was presented, though there was one discrepancy.
“The Department disagrees with the recommendation that the Chief of Police not allow education-based development (EBD) in lieu of discipline in cases in which the Office of Police Complaints (OPC) issue a sustained finding of misconduct by a hearing examiner,” wrote Lindsey Appiah, the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice. “EBD is designed to proactively address the root cause of and prevent the recurrence of misconduct as opposed to simply disciplining the officer. While some officers engage in intentional misconduct, others make mistakes and want to correct their behavior going forward. MPD does not believe in a one-size-fits-all model for discipline, nor do we believe that suspensions are a universal solution to reducing misconduct and improving employee behavior.”
Asked about that area of disagreement, Patterson said in some cases there’s just not enough accountability.
“There also should be discipline, there should be consequences for police misbehavior,” Patterson said. “Yes, the training is important, but there should be some element of discipline in order to reinforce the fact with others that you don’t want whatever this misbehavior is — you don’t want that to happen and happen over again.”
In the years after the NEAR Act passed, both violent and overall crime did steadily decrease, though the homicide rate was an outlier that went up. Since the pandemic, and critics will argue subsequent police reform measures, numerous types of crime have started to spike again. This audit didn’t look at those variables.
“I think the broader point here is, with the fear in our community today, we, the government, need to be doing everything possible, everything in our tool kit, everything that is sensible and legitimate to be doing,” Patterson said. “One of the findings in this report is that there were some very good ideas put on paper in 2016 that have not been implemented or have not been implemented effectively. And there’s no excuse for not trying whatever is legitimate and whatever the policymakers have said should be done as part of the bigger picture here.”
An audit released last year also looked at the influence of violence interrupters around the city, noting that it’s not clear the program has had an impact on things, though it’s also hard to determine when a violent crime was prevented before it happens.
