Safer streets and neighborhoods

The District, like many urban areas, has experienced a concerning rise in crime. Restoring a sense of safety and reducing crime in many neighborhoods will take time and effort.  The Council must practice effective oversight to ensure that we are making real progress on both goals.  

At the same time, we cannot afford to reverse recent criminal justice and police reform initiatives.  All DC residents need an effective police department, and an effective department is one that respects civil rights and uses force responsibly.  We additionally cannot respond to this moment by doubling down on mass incarceration.  Instead we must ensure that criminal justice and police reform efforts exist in tandem with a measured and responsible commitment to reducing crime. 

We know from rigorous research studies that between 200 and 500 individuals are responsible for 70% of violent crime in the city. Additionally, the majority of those involved in gun crime (perpetrators and victims) know one another, have ties to gangs and neighborhood crews, and/or are known to law enforcement or the criminal justice system. These facts counsel towards a targeted focus on diverting a small group of known individuals from violent crime through the delivery of social services, strategic investment in community building, deployment of violence interrupters, and targeted policing.

Voters should be wary of anyone who tells you the solution to a complex problem is to get the police force to an arbitrarily-selected round number. Let’s focus on quality, not quantity. To do that, we may need to increase funding for the police department, but let’s make sure we are doing so purposefully and in a thoughtful manner.

My Plan in Brief:

  • Invest in proven policing strategies that reduce crime without politicizing police reform or discounting the importance of also using strategies that rely less on law enforcement. 

  • Step up efforts to target illegal guns. 

  • Identify and deal with Root Causes. 

  • Raising education qualifications for MPD recruits.

  • Develop a “law school for cops” continuing education program at UDC’s David A. Clarke School of Law. 

  • Continue to invest in Violence Interruption Programs, while demanding measurable results

  • Invest in communities impacted by violence.

  • Ensure our response to violence is trauma-informed.

  • Continue and expand efforts to divert mental health calls to social workers. 

  • Re-Design Public Space with Safety in Mind.

  • Reduce encampments by using adequately nuanced solutions to reduce homelessness and provide unhoused Washingtonians the services they need and deserve.

MY PLan for An evidence-based approach to public safety and policing

As your Councilmember, I will advocate for:

  • Investing in proven policing strategies that reduce crime without politicizing police reform or discounting the importance of also using strategies that rely less on law enforcement.  Officials must move beyond finger-pointing and work together to form a comprehensive strategy aimed both at deterring crime in the short term and addressing root causes.  Police equipped with adequate training in bias recognition and de-escalation need to be utilized in concert with other actors, such as violence interrupters, faith and community leaders, mental health professionals, school leaders, and others working to broaden access to opportunity.  

  • Stepping up efforts to target illegal guns.  Most of the guns that are used to commit crime in the District are flooding in from other states, many illegally.  The Council must ensure that sufficient resources are directed to the difficult task of finding and closing the conduits by which guns enter the District.

  • Identifying and Dealing with Root Causes.  Violence is a symptom of a larger problem.  As we focus resources on combatting crime, we must take care to not ignore the importance of identifying and addressing the root causes of crime. That means committing to sustained investment in trauma-informed services for children and young adults in communities plagued by violence. 

  • Raising education qualifications for MPD recruits.  At present, MPD requires that candidates have 60 semester hours of college credit or experience serving in the military or a police department in another jurisdiction.  There is extensive evidence supporting increasing these requirements.  Police officers that have college degrees are less likely to use force, less likely to fire their service weapon, and much less likely to be the subject of citizen complaints or be terminated for misconduct.  Some studies have found that college-educated police officers are better equipped to succeed in a community policing model. 

  • Develop a “law school for cops” continuing education program at UDC’s David A. Clarke School of Law.  We know that effective training can reduce incidents of unlawful conduct by police officers.  This is one reason why police officers must be trained in de-escalation and implicit bias alongside other more traditional policing topics.   Police officers would also be well-served by gaining a deeper understanding of the laws that govern their conduct and the criminal justice system more generally.  Beyond abridged and superficial training, police officers receive limited training regarding Constitutional law, criminal law and procedure, and other legal topics. An innovative program at UDC (or maybe established in collaboration with multiple law schools in the District) could fill this gap. 

  • Continuing to invest in Violence Interruption Programs, while demanding measurable results.  Violence interrupters, which operate in high violence areas to de-escalate conflicts that lead to gun violence, are another important tool to combat gun violence.  The data regarding their impact in DC neighborhoods where there are active VI programs is encouraging and suggests that the programs could be even more impactful if there is funding is appropriate and predictable year-to-year. However, it is important to recognize that violence interrupters are not a replacement for other strategies.  For one, the programs are primarily intended to address reciprocal violence and are not designed to address intimate partner violence or non-targeted crime, such as armed robbery or carjacking, although there may be secondary impacts on other forms of violence to the extent the interrupters succeed in cultivating a peace-oriented culture.  Policymakers and advocates must also be honest that, despite some encouraging local data, the evidence supporting the effectiveness of violence interruption programs is currently mixed and underdeveloped.  The Council must exercise appropriate oversight to monitor the effectiveness of the programs and make course corrections as needed. 

  • Invest in communities impacted by violence. There is substantial evidence that well-run after school and summer programs can reduce violence by redirecting those most likely to be perpetuators or victims.  Similarly, when we invest in community-building initiatives and nonprofit groups, violence and crime tend to decline.  Violence interrupters serve a role, but we need to also invest in other actors to complement their work and the work of the law enforcement.  Examples include mental health professionals, public art and streetscaping crews to reclaim and improve public space, after school programs, youth sports, and internship and apprenticeship programs. 

  • Ensure our response to violence is trauma-informed. Violence is corrosive.  Research has shown definitively how extensively exposure to violence can damage a child’s development, academic performance, and trajectory in life.  

  • Continuing and expanding efforts to divert mental health calls to social workers.  According to research from the National Association of State Mental Health program Directors, people experiencing a mental health crisis comprise a quarter of the people shot by police.   Although police need to be trained in and encouraged to use de-escalation techniques, social workers are better equipped to respond to 911 calls regarding individuals behaving erratically.  

  • Re-Designing Public Space with Safety in Mind. Design plays an under-appreciated role in making communities safer.  When it comes to public safety, a variety of design measures, such as improving lighting and sight lines, have been shown to meaningfully deter crime.  Investing in walkability can also deter some crimes of opportunity because of the additional eyes on streets with higher pedestrian traffic. More generally, it is worth emphasizing that investing in neglected but vital public spaces (e.g. parks, recreation facilities, trails, and streetscapes) means investing in communities that have long been ignored.  This, by itself, can reduce crime and the circumstances that fuel it. Put differently, the chronic disinvestment in parks, streetscapes, and other public spaces east of the Anacostia River compared to Ward 3 has consequences. 

  • Reducing encampments by using adequately nuanced solutions to reduce homelessness and provide unhoused Washingtonians the services they need and deserve. The dramatic uptick in homelessness in the District has prompted a black-and-white debate about how the DC government should respond to encampments, which have proliferated in parks and other public spaces.  Public space belongs to all of us.  Parks should be welcoming spaces for everyone and it isn’t appropriate to allow them to be used indefinitely as an encampment site.  However, simply clearing homeless encampments without providing long-term housing and sufficient services is band-aid policymaking—addressing the visual signs of a problem without actually addressing root causes.  Housing-first policies, where the goal is to focus first on placing someone in housing and meeting basic needs before turning to other services, have proven effective at reducing homelessness.  But the key is to ensure that adequate and appropriate services are delivered to address each person’s individual needs. I have real concerns that that has not happened, either because of the pandemic, increased need, or lack of funding (or all three).  Failing to provide sufficient services to individuals, especially those dealing with substance abuse, mental health, or behavioral challenges, can lead to unnecessary friction with the community and ultimately to decreased support for housing-first and other compassionate, evidence-based solutions.  The Council must put politics aside, demand transparency from the executive, and exercise appropriate oversight to ensure services are being delivered appropriately.