Complying with the wave of nationwide protests against police brutality, Boston manifested its actions in the Boston Police Reform Task Force, convened by Mayor Martin Walsh in June.
The 11-member task force — composed of community leaders, advocates, members of the legal profession, and law enforcement members — reviewed the Boston Police Department’s (BPD) current policies and procedures, and drafted a report with recommendations for reform. During the final online public listening session on Sept. 22, members from the task force first reviewed and explained the report’s basic content. Following that, 14 attendees gave feedback for about 45 minutes, half of the listening session.
They engaged voices from the community and sought multiple rounds of public input. The task force continued receiving written comments until Sep. 25 through their website. The final recommendations will be submitted to the mayor and made available to the public in early October, said former U.S. Attorney and chair of the task force Wayne Budd in the listening session.
The report focuses on five main aspects: the creation of an independent Office of Police Accountability and Transparency (OPAT); the formalization and expansion of the BPD’s commitment to diversity and inclusion; the expansion of the use of the body-worn camera program; the enhancement of the BPD’s Use of Force policies; and the adoption of practices that could maximize public access to BPD records and data.
According to the report, OPAT would be an independent body from the police department, holding full investigatory and subpoena power. Replacing the current Civilian Ombudsman Oversight Panel (Co-Op), “OPAT would continue to review and resolve complaints made against the BPD’s Internal Investigation team, but it would also review and resolve civilian complaints,” the report wrote. It would also “investigate current and historic disparate treatment of Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) officers in the BPD and publish reports on the BPD’s progress on its various reform goals.”
To promote diversity and inclusion within the BPD and across Boston, the report added that BPD should develop a Diversity & Inclusion Unit. The task force proposed prioritizing the recruitment and hiring of BIPOC officers, as well as creating a preference for Boston Public School graduates.
Jamarhl Crawford, an activist and a member of the task force, said in the listening session that the BPD’s Use of Force policies were not necessarily the problem. “The problem was what happens if you violate those policies?” he explained. “So we try to deal with basically appropriate measures of accountability and transparency, which dealt with a lot of reporting, and that’s where the data is tied in.”
Attendees also brought up the issue of data transparency. They emphasized they would like to know how to access body camera recordings and police logs when needed.
Multiple attendees addressed the need for expertise in the BPD team related to domestic violence, mental illness, substance abuse and homelessness. With the involvement of trained professionals, BPD could remove some of their responsibilities when dealing with those special issues, as attendees suggested.
“When police are called to a situation where a person with SMI (serious mental illness) is psychotic, hallucinating, or otherwise in crisis and not thinking clearly, they should be accompanied by highly trained individuals to help de-escalate, so there will be less chance that force will be used,” one attendee said in the session. “They may have some training about SMI, but they are not social workers or other professionals with standard training.”
Another buzzword of the listening session was “time frame”. No matter if it is about civilian complaints or a public record request, the issue needs to be addressed in a timely manner, attendees proposed. “A process can take no more than X amount of months,” one attendee said. “Whatever the time frame is, it’s been found that in most governmental practices that really helps bring the issues to close.”
