#boscops
Boston residents organizing to challenge the power of the police!
#BosCops City Council Hearing June 19th, 2018! #AllEyesonBPD
Demand Community Control Over Police Surveillance in Boston
Since the hearing, we’ve been working on a community report to highlight the powerful testimonies that were collected! The media chose to ignore that the community made this hearing happened, that we packed the hearing chambers (with predominantly black and brown youth!), and that we are the experts on BPD’s surveillance because we not only experience it, but we have done our research on them!
Want to get involved? Email fahmad@muslimjusticeleague.org with some info about yourself (including what neighborhood you live in and if you are representing an org).
It's time to have a conversation about the ways Boston Police are using surveillance and technology in our city! Organizers have been pushing for transparency and community control over the ways the police watch, record, track, and share information about us.
Come with us to demand our freedom to move through Boston without fear of being watched, stopped, and harassed by the Boston Police!
We encourage you to submit testimony to the City Council online and bring it with you in person to the hearing. We also created a testimony template to make it easier for your to write your thoughts and comments. Check that out here: https://tinyurl.com/testimonyboscops
We collected some shared messages from Boston organizers and residents if you would like to echo them in your testimony: https://tinyurl.com/boscopsmessaging
Background info:
- In 2017, the Boston Police Department tested drones in the Bromley-Heath community in Jamaica Plain. A resident noticed and took photos. No one among the public even knew the BPD had drones. After they got caught, the police claimed they’d never used the drones.
- In 2014, 2015, and 2016, the Boston Police secretly used social media surveillance software to monitor the public. The Department searched for terms including #BlackLivesMatter and #MuslimLivesMatter.
- In 2013, the Boston Police used license plate readers, targeting mostly neighborhoods of color and low-income communities for increased surveillance. The Department never got City Council approval to use the technology, or discussed it with the public.
Communities from Oakland, California to Boston are organizing to require community control over police!
Join us for lunch on Saturday June 16 to get ready for the hearing!
Table of Contents:
Recommended Readings About Police Reform
Issue: Immigration and Police Policy
Issue: Surveillance of Muslims
Issue: Police Militarization and Use of Force
Issue: Transparency and Public Accountability
Recommended reading about policing reforms:
Police “reforms” you should always oppose
Movement for Black Lives Platform
“Will you Harbor me? On fighting police violence
Reparations won for victims of police torture in Chicago
You’re Already an Abolitionist
Envisioning an America Free from Police Violence and Control
MPD150: A People’s Project Evaluating Policing (Minneapolis)
Issue: Immigration and Police Policy
Background: The City of Boston has come out in defense of immigrants, but existing police policy puts immigrants at risk of ICE detention and deportation.
Thousands of people are arrested each year in the City of Boston for minor offenses like driving without a license, drug possession, and disorderly conduct. Data obtained by the ACLU show these minor arrests disproportionately impact Black and Latinx Bostonians.
Every time the Boston Police Department arrests someone, ICE is notified. This puts our immigrant neighbors and family at substantially greater risk for detention and deportation. Charges for these minor arrests are often dropped, but by then the damage has been done.
The Boston Police Department collects and shares information with the federal government about people who are not suspected of criminal activity. This policy resulted in the ICE detention of and initiation of deportation proceedings against at least one Boston public school student, after an unsubstantiated claim that he was in a gang was shared with ICE. We do not know how often BPD information sharing with ICE has led to detentions and deportations without due process, but we can safely assume this is not the first or only time.
UPDATE (February 2018): In recent months, we’ve become aware of a new problem linking BPD to immigration enforcement: the gang database. In Boston, like in other cities, the police maintain a gang database. Cops add people to the database based on a number of things, including: who you’re seen with, what you’re wearing, and whether you have specific tattoos. The Boston gang database is likely composed of mostly people of color. If you’re a citizen and you’re added to the gang database, the consequences are very harsh, including police harassment and enhanced sentencing. For immigrants, being listed in the BPD’s gang database can lead to ICE arresting and deporting you. That’s what we’re seeing here in Boston. In some cases, information coming from Boston Police assigned to Boston Public Schools is sent to the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC), and used to allege that students are involved in gangs. BRIC then allows ICE to access its gang database.
Questions:
- I don’t think it’s enough to simply say Boston is a sanctuary city. What will you do to prevent deportations and detentions of immigrant people in Boston?
- ICE is notified every time a person who is not a citizen is arrested, even if their case ends up being dismissed. What will you do to limit the number of arrests for minor offenses in the City?
- I’ve heard that Boston is a safe city for immigrants, but I know that the Boston Police share information with the federal government even if they aren’t investigating them for a serious crime. What will you do to prevent the Boston Police from sharing info with the federal government about people who aren’t suspected of serious crimes?
Policy solutions:
- Instruct the Boston Police Commissioner to end the practice of minor arrests
- Amend the Boston Police Department privacy policy to prevent surveillance, information and collection for people not suspected of crimes
- Stop BPD from sharing information in the gang database with ICE
- End the gang database
Additional reading:
How sanctuary cities can protect undocumented immigrants from ICE data mining
Resistance to Broken Windows Policing in NYC
From Gang Allegations to Deportation: How Boston is Putting its Immigrant Youth in Harm’s Way
A Minor Fight In A Boston School Landed One Student In ICE Custody, Advocates Fear
How ICE Uses Secret Police Databases to Arrest Immigrants
Tracked and Targeted: Early Findings on Chicago’s Gang Database
Documents:
Boston Police Gang Policy and Gang Worksheet
Boston Police Department and Boston Public Schools memorandum of understanding
Infographic: How information about students moves from BPS to BPD to ICE
Issue: Surveillance of Muslims
Background: The Boston Police Department participates in a “Countering Violent Extremism” program that claims to prevent “radicalization” but in reality results in discriminatory, unwarranted surveillance of Muslim communities. In Boston, BPD’s program is called “Youth and Police Initiative Plus” and it targets Somali young people.
The program relies on debunked theories that normal adolescent behaviors like spending time alone in your room or “living in a dangerous neighborhood” or “mistrusting police” are precursors to committing crimes or acts of violence. YPIP assumes Somalis are a potential threat due to the social and economic trauma they experience as immigrants and refugees. The application lists “unaccountable times and unobserved spaces” as a potential “risk factor” for Somali youth in Boston, implying that for Somali youth, privacy is dangerous.
BPD also participates in federal investigations with the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and information sharing with the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC). Current BPD policy allows people to be under surveillance and investigation even if they are not suspected of any crime.
BPD should not engage in suspicionless and warrantless investigations, either at the local or federal level. We know that recently a Boston Police officer assigned to the JTTF targeted and surveilled a Boston-based Dakota Access Pipeline protester in North Dakota.
Programs like YPIP in Boston and BPD collaboration with JTTF are discriminatory, restrict religious expression, worsen harassment of marginalized communities, suppress open dialogue and dissent, and do nothing to advance public safety.
Questions:
- Do you support or oppose Countering Violent Extremism programs like Youth and Police Initiative Plus in Boston?
- Muslim people are under attack by the Trump administration. Will you protect Muslim people in Boston by instructing the police commissioner to end BPD’s involvement in countering violent extremism programs that target muslims and share private information with the federal government?
- Muslim people deserve to access social services without fear of surveillance and stigma. What will you do to ensure funding is available to support social services for immigrant communities that is not tied to law enforcement?
- Boston elected officials showed up to the airport and to the demonstration in Copley to protest the Muslim Ban. But I want to make sure you have an action plan. What will you do to protect Muslim Bostonians and activists from unwarranted federal harassment and surveillance?
- Boston is home to the largest mosque in New England. What will you do to make sure Muslim people are able to practice in Boston free from fear of surveillance from local and federal law enforcement?
Policy solutions:
- Twenty-nine organizations have endorsed the demands below, which were sent to BPD. We have not heard back from them yet.
- End involvement in countering violent extremism programs (called by any name, and funded by any means or not at all) that credit false and stigmatizing theories about predispositions toward violence or “extremism,” including Youth and Police Initiative Plus.
- Develop through a democratic process stringent rules for separating community outreach initiatives and social services initiatives from intelligence gathering operations.
- Cease collaboration with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF).
- Modify the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC) privacy and civil liberties policy to institute a criminal predicate requirement for surveillance, intelligence collection, and information sharing.
- Endorse and publicly support the Massachusetts Safe Communities Act (S.1305, H. 3269).
Additional reading:
Coalition letter opposing Countering Violent Extremism
More info about Countering Violent Extremism
Impacts of CVE on Massachusetts Communities
Muslim Queer led actions around the country resisting surveillance and racial profiling
Issue: Racial Profiling
Background: By every measure, white people and people of color in Boston experience profoundly different treatment at the hands of the Boston Police Department. Within the context of the larger conversation about white supremacy in our city and country, we must consider the role the police play in enforcing racism.
The Boston Police Department explicitly states "Our mission is community policing." The Boston Police Department's presence in the community continues to be defined by thousands of street investigations every year which predominantly target people of color.
According to data from the Boston Police Department analyzed and reported by the Boston Globe, 70% of the nearly 15,000 individuals that police observed, interrogated, or searched in 2016 were Black. Black people make up 25% of the population in Boston. These searches are known as “stop and frisks” or “Field Interrogations and Observations.”
Racial bias in policing is so extreme in our state that the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruled that Black people fleeing police have a legitimate reason do so, and that when an individual flees it doesn’t necessarily means the person is guilty. The SJC ruling cited data about racial disparities in FIOs to conclude that many police encounters with people of color are unfair and unjustified.
These street stops are in addition to racially biased traffic stops. According to a 2004 report by Northeastern University Institute on Race and Justice, Black drivers made up 13.7% of the driving population in Boston, but 32% of the driving citations issued by police. The SJC is currently considering whether pre-contextual stops of drivers (traffic stops in which a police officer uses a traffic violation as an excuse to stop a driver that the officer wants to stop for other reason like an unrelated criminal offense) are constitutional.
Questions:
- I don’t believe hiring more police officers of color will solve the problem of racial disparities in stops and arrests. What will you do instead to address these disparities?
- Stop and frisks don’t contribute to public safety. 15,000 stop and frisks is too many. What will you do to reduce the number field Interrogations and Observations in Boston?
- Do you think racial profiling is a problem in Boston? What do you plan to do about it in office?
- According to Boston Police Department data, most stop and frisks in Boston happen without reasonable suspicion of a crime. What will you do to protect all Bostonians 4th amendment rights?
- Boston Police practices like FIOs make it harder for Black and Brown people to move freely around Boston and enjoy the same quality of life as white residents. What would you say to people of color who have experience repeated stops and harassment by Boston police officers?
Policy solutions:
- Reduce or eliminate the practice of stop and frisks (Field Interrogations and Observations)
- Collect and report data on FIOs in real time
- Abolish pre-contextual stops (traffic stops in which a police officer uses a traffic violation as an excuse to stop a driver that the officer wants to stop for other reason like an unrelated criminal offense)
Additional reading:
A more diverse police force doesn’t solve racial disparities
Black people remain focus of Boston Police Investigations, searches
Ending stop and frisks does not increase crime
Pre-contextual traffic stops drive racial profiling
Black men have legitimate reason to flee the police
Issue: Drug arrests
Background: Officials across Massachusetts say “we cannot arrest our way out of the problem” of addiction. Yet drug arrests, prosecutions, and convictions continue to be Boston’s primary response to drug use and sales. Meanwhile, Boston residents struggling with drug addiction lack access to healing, housing, and treatment. One major problem in Boston is that people are unable to transition from detox to longer-term or residential programs because beds are not available.
There are significant disparities in access to care and treatment along race and class lines. According to the 2015 report Addiction and Recovery Services in the City of Boston,”There are vast disparities in need among, and access to treatment and services is not adequate for, certain populations including females, cultural and linguistic minorities and people who are homeless, have serious mental illness, traumatic brain injury and/or PTSD.”
There are also major disparities in the rates of arrests for drugs. Across the nation, white people are more likely to use and sell drugs than people of color, yet substantially less likely to be arrested for those offenses. Although people of color make up less than 25% of Massachusetts’ population and less than 28% of people convicted of drug possession, they are roughly 55% of those convicted of drug distribution and 75% of those convicted of mandatory minimums drug offenses. Despite the fact that Black people make up only 23% of the population in Boston, they accounted for 36% of drug arrests during the years 2012-2016. Whites, meanwhile, were underrepresented; 46% of the population of the City is white, but whites were only 36% of all drug arrests.
The state’s own data shows that using police and jails as a response to addiction is deadly. Often people arrested on drug charges will spend weeks or months in jail unable to afford bail. According to the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, “The risk of opioid-related death following release from incarceration is more than 50 times greater than for the general public. What’s more concerning is that the threat is immediate. Fatal overdoses during the first month after release are six times higher than for all other post-incarceration periods.” Incarcerating people with substance abuse issues can literally be a death sentence.
At the federal level and in Massachusetts, there is a push to increase penalties including mandatory minimums for people who sell drugs despite decades of proof that criminalization and incarceration do not prevent addiction or overdose. We also know that many people who use drugs also sell them. While officials at the Department of Justice and at the Massachusetts State House push for more punishment, there’s a need to demand more compassionate policies in our city.
Questions:
- The Massachusetts Department of Public Health reported that people are fifty times more likely to die from opiate overdose when they're released from jail. Incarcerating drug users can be a death sentence. How can you justify continuing War on Drugs strategies to fight the opioid crisis, when we know it's killing people?
- The war on drugs has been raging for decades, but heroin is stronger, cheaper, and more available than ever. If elected, what will you do that’s different?
- I hear elected officials say we can’t arrest our way out of the problem, but we’re still doing it. I think the only way forward is to decriminalize drugs. Do you support drug decriminalization, why or why not?
- People who use drugs deserve dignity, respect, and access to meaningful harm reduction services. If elected, what will you do to decrease drug arrests and increase equitable access to treatment?
- I know the Melnea Cass and Mass Ave intersection is an area of concern for my fellow Boston residents. I believe a supervised injection facility and more access to treatment will increase health and safety for all of us. Do you support a supervised injection facility in Boston?
- I’m angry that Black and Brown people are more likely to be arrested for drugs and less likely to get access to treatment. How do you plan to end racial disparities in drug policing?
- For decades in Massachusetts, marijuana was illegal. Even after decriminalization in 2008, Black people were 3.3 times more likely to be arrested for marijuana offenses than whites. Now that marijuana is legal, what will you do to address the harm prohibition caused so disproportionately to our Black neighbors and family?
Policy solutions:
- End the practice of arresting people for drugs
- Implement pre-arrest diversion programs. (Pre-arrest diversion programs redirect people to services and programs before they are booked into the criminal punishment system. Rather than being arrested and arraigned, people are connected to case managers or other providers for support. A strong program would require police officers to divert for certain offenses, not exclude people based on previous offenses, and ensure that resources are available for diversion. An ideal program would remove police from the response and instead send providers, social workers, or community members to serve the person who is using and/or selling drugs.)
- Reduce spending on law enforcement and increase investment in healing, housing, and treatment
- Adequately fund all phases of treatment including detox and residential programs
- Open safe injection facilities in Boston
- Repeal mandatory minimums
Additional reading:
Sentencing data from the Massachusetts Department of Corrections
Baker proposes manslaughter charge for drug dealers
White people are more likely to deal drugs, but black people are more likely to get arrested for it
Issue: Police Militarization and Use of Force
Background: In recent years police departments’ across America have put their arsenals of weapons, technology, and armoured vehicles on display in response to protests and demonstrations. People in Boston and around the country have expressed concern about policing using weapons of war against residents in their own neighborhoods.
The threats of police militarization have escalated under the Trump administration. In August, President Trump eliminated rules put in place by the Obama administration limiting the types of military weaponry local and state police could obtain free of charge through the federal government’s 1033 program. Also during the summer of 2017, President Trump equated neo-Nazis and white supremacists in Charlottesville with the counter-protesters who turned out to denounce their bigotry and hatred. Finally, Trump told a gathering of law enforcement officials that they shouldn’t go easy on suspects, comments that were widely interpreted as an endorsement of police brutality. This federal backdrop sets our nation on an even more dangerous course. We need to ensure our Mayor and City Council protect Boston from this dangerous path.
Officials in Boston have said that Boston is not Ferguson, yet Boston Police officers have killed a number of Black men in recent years and for the past 30 years all but one person killed by BPD were people of color. In each recent case, the District Attorney for Suffolk County has cleared officers of wrongdoing. But the District Attorney is not an impartial investigator. In his role as D.A., he frequently works side by side with members of the BPD to investigate and prosecute people. Police and prosecutors are therefore on the same team, which introduces an unavoidable conflict of interest when the District Attorney is tasked with investigating police use of deadly force.
Recently in Boston, many demonstrators witnessed a militarized response to the Fight Supremacy protest. More than 30 people who came to the Boston Common to protest against white supremacy were arrested by the Boston Police Department who were in full SWAT gear. Some demonstrators reported being pepper sprayed and beaten by Boston Police officers.
(Photo by Derek Hanlon)
Questions:
- What weapons and equipment do the Boston police currently have and what instructions would you give the Commissioner about using them?
- What will you do to make sure the Boston Police Department doesn’t militarize?
- Will you prohibit the BPD from participating the in military’s 1033 program?
- Will you support a local law to require democratic approval, oversight, and transparency before the police acquire new military-style equipment?
- I’m concerned that when the Boston Police Department use excessive force against one of my neighbors, there’s not a fair or transparent process in place to address the incident. What will you do to make sure officers are held accountable when they use force?
Policy solutions:
- Pass a local law requiring democratic approval, oversight, and transparency before law enforcement can acquire new military-style equipment.
- Conduct an investigation into the use of SWAT raids by the BPD.
- Change BPD policy to bar the use of SWAT raids to serve routine, drug related search warrants.
Additional reading:
Will MA legislators stand up to the militarized police state?
ACLU of Massachusetts report on police militarization in the Commonwealth
ACLU report on police militarization nationwide
Petition to Drop the Charges against Fight Supremacy protesters
The Mothers Who Lost Their Children to Police Brutality
Terrence Coleman’s mother demands justice
Issue: Plain clothes policing
Background: Several tactical units of the Boston Police Department patrol in plain clothes. They often drive unmarked vehicles while wearing cargo shorts, jeans, sweatshirts, hats, and sneakers on duty. Some Bostonians know these officers as "the jump out boys" because of their reputation for being more aggressive and using intimidation tactics against residents.
There is almost no public information available about the number of officers, budget, equipment used, complaints against, stops or arrest data of the Youth Violence Strike Force, the Drug Control Unit, or the Anti-Crime unit.
Plain clothes policing is a policy that exemplifies the disparity between how white people and people of color have different experiences with the Boston Police Department. This kind of aggressive policing is focused on communities of color.
Questions:
- Do you support ending the practice of plain clothes policing in Boston? Why or why not?
- Will you investigate the conduct of plain clothes policing forces in Boston to assess their impact on the communities they operate in?
- Will you make public information about plain clothes policing in Boston?
Policy solutions:
- Collect and report data including number of officers and spending reports from all tactical units
- Abolish plain clothes policing
Additional reading:
Issue: Overtime Spending
Background:
The total fiscal year (FY) 2018 Boston Police Department budget is $373,380,191. In FY 2016, the BPD was allocated $35,028,750 for overtime but spent $57,479,518. In FY 2017 and FY 2018, budget allocations for overtime are over 55 million dollars. Of the city’s 100 top paid employees in 2017, 98 of them were police officers.
Police overtime spending exceeds spending on youth jobs and community centers. Current overtime policies allow for excessive spending including a mandate that officers testifying in court are paid for a minimum of four hours even if they’re there less than an hour. Boston Police officers collect pay for thousands of hours for construction details, while civilians flaggers work those sites in other cities and states.
Boston spends $554 per capita on policing - more than many other major US cities including Chicago, Atlanta, Detroit, Houston, LA, and Minneapolis.
Questions:
- The City of Boston currently spends more on police overtime than on youth jobs and community centers. If you’re elected what will you do to reduce police overtime spending?
- I don’t believe that hiring more cops is the right solution to excessive police overtime spending. Instead I think we can change policies so cops don’t work construction details or get paid for hours they don’t work. If elected, can I count on you to restrict police overtime spending rather than hiring more officers?
- Our city spends way too much on police overtime. Will you support stricter limitations on police overtime spending so we can invest those cost savings in housing, education, youth jobs, and drug treatment?
Possible policy solutions:
- Severely limit police overtime spending
- End the practice of police construction details and allow civilian flaggers
- Change overtime policy to prohibit payment for hours that police don’t work
- Divest from police overtime spending and invest in youth jobs, education, and housing
Additional reading:
Freedom to Thrive: Reimagining Safety & Security in our Communities
Issue: Transparency and Public Accountability
Background: The Boston Police Department has made some progress in terms of opening its data to the public. For example, every day the BPD automatically posts the most recent incident report metadata from across the city on the City’s open data portal. But currently, arrest data and stop and frisk data (also known as FIO) are not available to the public on an ongoing basis on the city’s data portal. These data can be posted online without compromising the privacy of Boston residents, by way of simple-to-automate data minimization. FIO and arrest data are critical to understanding the impact of policing in Boston.
In addition to data about the way our neighbors are treated by police, the public should also have a right to expect information about the technology and tactics used by the Boston Police Department in our neighborhoods. There seems to be a pattern of the Boston Police Department not disclosing new or potential surveillance technology to residents. Last year, a bid to purchase social media spying software for $1.3 million dollars was reported by the Boston Globe, revealing that neither the public nor the public knew about BPD’s plans. The BPD abandoned their plans to purchase the spying software thanks to organizing and public outrage.
More recently, the Boston Police Department purchased drones without the input or consent of residents, and were observed flying the drones over public housing in Jamaica Plain. In order to residents to have a say about how our communities are being surveilled and patrolled, the city of Boston needs to institute oversight and accountability policies before the department can purchase and implement more technology.
Questions:
- Will you instruct the Boston Police Department to make arrest and FIO data available in near-real-time on the city’s open data portal?
- How will you use data to judge the performance of the BPD with respect to racial profiling?
- I don’t want the police flying drones over my neighborhood. What will you to do to limit the Boston police’s power to use invasive surveillance technology in our city?
- The Cambridge and Somerville are currently considering policies that would require democratic transparency and oversight before the police department can purchase or use surveillance technology. Would you support a similar local law in Boston?
Possible policy solutions:
- Put all arrest data and FIO data online in near-real-time, stripped of personally identifiable information.
- Require public hearings and approval before the Boston Police Department can acquire or implement surveillance tools and technology, like ordinances they’re working on currently in Somerville and Cambridge
Additional reading:
Stanford Open Policing Project
Open Data Projects Are Fueling the Fight Against Police Misconduct
We Need Accountability for Surveillance Now
Community Control over Police Surveillance
Issue: Community Oversight
Background: While Boston has taken steps to allow for community review of civilian complaints against police officers in the form of the Community Ombudsman Oversight Panel (CO-OP), the Panel has limited power to hold officers accountable. The current CO-OP is made up of a former police officer, a former judge, and a former city employee. These members documented resident dissatisfaction, severe delays and bias in the investigation process, and lack of referrals to the panel in their December 2015 report to Mayor Walsh.
Boston community members continue to push for the adoption of body cameras after Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson killed Michael Brown in 2014. Boston Police officers are no longer wearing body cameras after the year-long pilot program. The Boston Police Department is planning a nine-month study on the body camera program.
Questions:
- What did the city of Boston learn from the Body Camera Pilot program? Why will it take so long to come up with a final plan for the body camera program?
- If elected or reelected Mayor of Boston, will you commit to adopting a permanent body-worn camera program by the end of 2018?
- What policy measures would need to be addressed for you to feel comfortable moving forward with a body-worn camera program?
- I’m concerned that police body camera footage will get used against residents who are on film. What will you do to ensure that the body camera policy protects our privacy?
- I’m interested in serving on a community police oversight board. If you’re elected, what will you do to increase community control over police?
- I don’t trust the process when residents file complaints against the police. Do you support giving the Community Ombudsman Oversight Panel the power to decide which cases it will review?
Possible policy solutions:
- Disband the CO-OP and establish a diverse, representative independent community board with the power to subpoena, investigate, discipline, and fire police officers
- Implement a body worn camera program, along with a policy that mandates public transparency and personal privacy
Additional reading:
More information about the Community Ombudsman Oversight Panel
Community Ombudsman Oversight Panel’s recommendations to Mayor Marty Walsh
#BosCops 2017 Election Details
Community organizing groups and advocacy organizations got together to create questionnaires for the Mayoral and City Council candidates so we could get more information about their plans and policies related to policing in our city. Here are their full responses.
Responded | NO RESPONSE |
Tito Jackson | Marty Walsh |
Bowser, Ciommo, Edwards, Essaibi-George, Janey, King, Mobilia, Pressley, Wu | Baker, Campbell, DaRosa, Faulk, Flaherty, Flynn, Garrison, Kelley, McCarthy, O’Malley, Passacantilli, Payaso |
Now that election results are in, residents have the opportunity to push our elected officials to implement the policing policy changes we want to see in our city! We encourage you to check out the winners’ responses to the policing questionnaite and hold them accountable to their commitments.
ELECTION RESULTS:
Mayor - Marty Walsh*
At Large - Essaibi-George, Flaherty*, Pressley, Wu
District 1 - Edwards
District 2 - Flynn
District 7- Janey
District 8 - Zakim*
District 9 - Ciommo
*Did not respond to questionnaire
Why policing? We focused on policing because it affects every aspect of our lives in Boston. Our city continues to struggle with systemic racism and policing is part of the system that maintains white supremacy. Often the discussion centers on how police are or are not responding to violence, so we wanted to broaden and deepen the conversation by asking about a range of policing issues.
Why the election? It’s important to remind voters, the press, and especially candidates for local office that the Mayor and City Council have policing oversight responsibilities. The mayor has the power to appoint and fire the Commissioner of the Boston Police Department and shape the culture of policing in the city. City Council has the power to approve or deny the budget, to hold hearings, to pass ordinances, and to subpoena information from City agencies and offices. Residents of Boston deserve to hear how their Mayor and City Council will use their power to ensure all of us are treated with respect, dignity, and fairness.
We created this toolkit for residents to offer more context about policing policy and some strategies for engaging with candidates. You might be still deciding who you are going to vote for, and how candidates address policing issues may sway who you are going to support. Or, you may already actively support a candidate and want to push them to be better (or to clarify their positions) on policing. We hope this toolkit will equip you to be more involved in the 2017 election! You can join our Facebook event to get reminders about election events, sample messages and more!
READ AND SHARE CANDIDATES’ RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE HERE
- If a candidate in your district did not respond, reach out to them. Ask them why they didn’t complete the questionnaire, and where they stand on these issues.
For more information about the ACLU of Massachusetts, go to:
For more information about the Muslim Justice League, go to:
http://www.muslimjusticeleague.org/
For more information about Families for Justice as Healing, go to:
For more information about CAIR-Massachusetts, go to:
For more information about Young Abolitionists, go to:
www.facebook.com/youngabolitionists
For more information about Jewish Voice for Peace - Boston, go to:
For more information about Digital Fourth, go to:
For more information about Boston Police Camera Action Team go to: