The URL can be used to link to this page

PSC Agenda packet 4-27-17 Council Public Safety Committee 2nd Floor Conference Room City Hall April 27, 2017 3:00 p.m. Members: Staff: Others: Councilmember Mendez (chair) City Manager Cliff Moore Councilmember Coffey Police Chief Dominic Rizzi Councilmember D. Gutierrez Fire Chief Bob Stewart Councilmember Lover (alternate) City Prosecutor Cynthia Martinez Brad Coughenour Scott Schafer Agenda 1. Approval of March 23, 2017 minutes 2. New Business 2a. Body Camera update - Rizzi 2b. Debrief of Kronenberg report - Schneider 2c. Homicide update – Schneider 2d. Mini mart robbery update – Schneider 2e. Response to David Morales Email dated April 7, 2017 - Martinez 3. Old Business 4. Other Business 5. Information items 5a. YPAL February 2017 report 6. Recap of future agenda items 7. Audience Participation 8. Adjournment Council Public Safety Committee March 23, 2017 MINUTES Members: Staff: Councilmember Carmen Mendez (chair) City Manager Cliff Moore Councilmember Kathy Coffey Capt. Jeff Schneider, Police Councilmember Dulce Gutierrez Deputy Chief Mark Soptich, Fire Bronson Faul, Legal Scott Schafer, Public Works Randy Beehler, Community Relations Terri Croft, Police Others: Sarah Augustine, DRC Director Melissa Hill, DRC Board of Directors The meeting was called to order at 3:02 p.m. 1. Approval of minutes of February 23, 2017 It was MOVED by Gutierrez to approve the minutes of the February 23, 2017 meeting as presented. Motion was SECONDED by Coffey. Motion PASSED unanimously. New Business 2. Yakima Valley Special Investigations Unit Schneider presented a proposed interlocal agreement between the Yakima Police Department, the Washington State Patrol, and several local police agencies. The agreement would form a unit to investigate significant incidences of officer involved use of force. As Yakima Police Department is the largest agency in the area, we would need to partner with multiple smaller agencies to conduct the investigations. This agreement would keep agencies from investigating their own officers’ use of force incidents. Coffey asked if the department was recommending the agreement go forward. Schneider advised yes, that is the recommendation. The agreement is the best scenario available to improve transparency in these major investigations. Coffey asked if, as the largest agency in the area, this agreement would tax the resources of the Yakima Police Department. Schneider did not believe it would cause any issues, as the types of incidents to be investigated happen infrequently. Mendez agreed that the agreement was good for transparency. She asked if the Yakima Police Patrolmans Association (YPPA) supported the agreement. Schneider replied that the union had not stated a position on the issue. He said that some individual officers had expressed some nervousness because it was a new procedure, however, ultimately, all the officer want is a quality investigation, which he believes this agreement will provide. Mendez asked how long it would take to implement the agreement. Schneider advised that it would be effective 90 days after all participating agencies signed the agreement. Mendez inquired about funding for the program. Schneider replied that there was no funding for the program. Mendez further asked about money set aside for outside investigations. Schneider clarified that there are two investigations that occur with a major use of force incident; the criminal investigation, which this agreement covers, and the administrative investigation, which is conducted by internal affairs. Mendez expressed the desire to continue the conversation of moving to fully outside administrative investigations. It was MOVED by Coffey and SECONDED by Gutierrez to forward the agreement to the full council with a recommendation to accept. Motion PASSED unanimously. Item will be placed on the April 4, 2017 council agenda. Old Business 3. Welcoming City community conversation Sarah Augustine, Director of the Dispute Resolution Center of Yakima and Kittitas Counties, and Melissa Hill, DRC Board of Directors, were welcomed to the meeting. Augustine presented revised proposal for the DRC to facilitate a community conversation regarding the welcoming city tensions. The proposal recommended a meeting in each district and would shift the conversation away from a “yes or no” on the welcoming city resolution and instead focus on the underlying stressors or tensions. After the district meetings are held, an agenda would be built to bring to the council. This process would create an opportunity for more open dialog rather than “open mike” type statements. Mendez stated that the committee members had met and reviewed the proposal. Although they felt it was a great strategy, they did not feel that the city should be responsible for the cost, especially at a time when the council is looking to cut costs. She understands that community sponsors are being sought to cover the cost of the proposal. Coffey discussed an alternative, which would be similar to the DRC proposal but would be held at the Convention Center with breakout discussion groups by city district at the beginning of the meeting, and then having all the groups come together at the end of the meeting for discussion. Gutierrez stated that the current discussion is not advocating for a welcoming or sanctuary city, but is for an inclusive public safety ordinance. She felt that when the issue was the resolution, it was appropriate for community discussion. However, the current issue is an ordinance, which is policy setting, and is a responsibility of the council. She expressed concern over what the public discussion would cover and that continuing discussion would put the validity of the ordinance at risk. She expressed further uncertainty to the logistics of a community discussion regarding the ordinance. Coffey stated that an ordinance is a law, and asked if ordinance was enacted and it is interpreted that the police didn’t follow the ordinance, what the ramifications would be. Moore advised it would be similar to the current process for allegations of inappropriate officer conduct. Allegations would be reviewed, investigated, and officers subject to discipline if the allegation is sustained. There would not be criminal penalties for violations. Coffey was concerned over some of the ordinance language that she felt was open to interpretation. Schneider stated that the police department would want a clearly worded ordinance. Augustine advised that the DRC does not take a position in the matter and the forum would not be a “debate” with facts presented. The forum would be a community conversation. Moore said that the focal point of the issue has changed. At the time of the initial DRC proposal, the issue was a resolution that sparked discord in the community. The current issue is a city ordinance, which is a city responsibility, and it is difficult to ask the community for funding a discussion of something that is a city responsibility. There was additional discussion regarding the perception of the community on the issue, the need to be cautious and realistic regarding federal funding, and the need to refine the language of the ordinance. Augustine added that conflict comes from people having different interests and different points of view. Resolution comes from the opportunity to hear the differing viewpoints. She did not feel the underlying root of the concerns would go away any time soon. Moore advised he would discuss the issue with each council member in his one-on-one meetings with them to find out what direction they would like to see the council and staff take. Other Business 4a. Homeless Encampment Moore reviewed the opening of the homeless camp near the Wastewater facility. The camp had 52 people signed in on its opening night. The camp appears to be well organized and is working through some minor issues. Moore has met with the Greenway and Arboretum boards. A business outreach group has addressed concerns immediately. Mendez asked if the City was accounting for in-kind funds. Moore advised that the City is billing for some items, such as the installation of a pole for power. Mendez stated she would like to see any services the city provides tracked. She asked about the maximum capacity of the camp, as she understood it to be 50 people. Moore advised that was correct, and if there continue to be more people than the maximum capacity, a lease modification proposal may need to be brought forward. 4b. Student Paper Coffey inquired if the other committee members had read the study by Lea Kronenberg. Ms. Kronenberg is a graduate student at Evergreen College who wrote an analysis of gang issues in Yakima. The other committee members had not fully reviewed the paper. Coffey felt it was important to consider how to support the police and also support and guide youth in the community. 5. Audience participation There was no audience participation 6. Information items There were no information items 7. Recap of future agenda items Debrief of Kronenberg report Update on homicides Briefing on robberies 8. Good of the order Coffey asked what suggestions Schneider would have for the direction of the Public Safety Committee. Schneider advised that strong families deter most crime and anything that can be done to support strong families would help. There was further discussion on the benefits of community policing. Adjournment Meeting was adjourned at 4:03 p.m. Approved: Society's Contribution to the Gang Problem: Case Study of Yakima, Washington Written by: Lea Kronenberg Criminal Justice Reform Fall 2016 Introduction: In the United States, the problem of gangs and gang violence is addressed through three well- known practices; prevention, intervention and suppression. Prevention programs target youth at-risk of gang involvement and help reduce the number of youth who join gangs. The “CO-OPP”- Creating Community Opportunities for Tacoma’s Youth in Tacoma, Washington works with 10-24 year olds providing mentorship and social services to help them live a gang-free life. Intervention programs provide services for youth who are actively involved in gangs to help them steer away from gang life. Homeboy Industries, based in Los Angeles, California, is the most successful and comprehensive intervention program in the United States. Homeboy Industries offers gang members, at-risk and previously incarcerated community members educational and employment opportunities, mental health services, drug rehabilitation, family counseling and tattoo removal for free! Suppression, according to the National Institute of Justice “encompasses a broad range of criminal justice activities in which law enforcement, prosecution, probation and parole focus their resources to limit and assure accountability for the criminal activity of gangs and gang members”. The best practice for reducing gang crime is to create a pyramid of these three techniques, with prevention at the base and suppression at the top, but this seldom happens. Government and law enforcement agencies generally only support suppression by establishing specialized gang units and gang databases to track and identify gang members, and by sentencing gang members for longer prison terms (Webb, Et.al, 2014). In 2008, the Washington State Legislature passed just such a bill. HB 27-12 included these provisions as well as gang injunctions, the creation of new laws and adjustments to existing laws that further criminalize adult gang members for involving juveniles in a felony crime or gang recruitment, and gang graffiti. According to HB 27-12, a “criminal street gang” is defined as “an organization, association, or group of three or more people with a common name or identifying sign or symbol, one of the primary activities of which is the commission of crimes, and the members of which engage in a pattern of criminal street gang activity.” A gang member is defined as “a person who actively participates in a criminal street gang and intentionally assists in a criminal act by the gang”. This determination is left to the discretion of law enforcement during the time of arrest, and to the courts during prosecution. Suppression practices are based on deterrence theory (Braga, 2014), which claims that treating gang members harshly and quickly and sending them to prison will deter other gang members from committing crimes or joining gangs. But many question the effectiveness of these practices. For example, millions of people smoke cigarettes but are not deterred by their increased chances of getting cancer. People don’t obey speed limits even though they know they are more likely to have an accident or get a ticket. Many people engage in activities fully aware of the possible negative consequences, but are not deterred. Generally, gangs and gang violence are viewed as a criminal problem, bad individuals who should be locked up. This perspective completely ignores the social factors and historical events that have pushed marginalized people into cycles of violence and criminality. Gangs would not exist if there weren’t a need for them. Research reveals that gangs are a reaction to social, economic and racial inequalities that cannot be solved by the use of suppression. Instead of addressing the root issues that have led to gangs and gang violence, government, law enforcement and most uninformed citizens blame and punish individual gang members with the expectation of increased public safety and reduction of crime. However, this has proven to be ineffective and costly. Many gang scholars agree that intervention and prevention programs are the best methods to create safer communities and reduce violence. This paper examines gangs and gang violence as they relate to culture, race, social inequality, government, and law enforcement with a specific focus on Yakima, Washington. Section 2: Social Factors and Gangs The Office of Juvenile Justice and Detention Prevention’s (OJJDP) identifies two main categories that lead youth to join a gang, risk factors and attractions. Attractions include the influence of popular culture, because they think it will be fun, for protection, to be with their friends or romantic partners who have joined a gang, and to make money. Risk factors that may impel a youth to join a gang can include aspects of their community (economically disadvantaged, availability of drugs, lack of social opportunities & capital), their family (parental alcohol/drug abuse, family members in a gang, lack of adult male role models, and low socioeconomic status), their school (academic failure, negative labeling by teachers, educational frustration, low educational aspirations,and feeling unsafe), their peer group (associating with delinquent peers, gang members in class, and low commitment to positive peers) and individual factors (antisocial behavior, mental health problems, drug and alcohol use, victimization and negative life events). The more risk factors a youth experiences, the more likely he will join a gang or become delinquent. Considering these risk factors and attractions is critical when creating policies and laws to address gangs and gang violence. Living in a poor community or household is a major risk factor. There are strong connections between poverty, underemployment, and crime (Kelly, 2000, Maxon, et.al, 2014, Boyle, 2010). High poverty rates coincide with high crime rates (Kelly, 2000). If you are unable to find work, you are more likely to engage in illegal activities as a means of survival. “Holding a legitimate job was associated with significantly reduced levels of violence and drug arrests” (Spergel, et.al, 2014 pg.458). When there are no lawful opportunities to make money, people will find other ways to do so. Father Greg Boyle, a.k.a G-Dog or Father G, is a Jesuit pastor who has been working with gang members in the barrios of Los Angeles, California since 1988. Father G is the founder of HomeBoy Industries, and for years he has said “Nothing stops a bullet like a job”. By providing jobs to the homeboys on the streets, they stay off the streets. You don’t see active street gangs in wealthy or affluent areas. Many scholars agree that gangs are a rational response to the burden of poverty. If there were more opportunities for people to work and support themselves, it is certain that violence and crime would be reduced. Local and state government could invest in the community and help fund jobs in areas where there is little work available. Another factor is the age of the individual. In the beginning stages of adolescence, children start to see themselves as separate from their families and begin to look outward to build social connections (Scott, et.al, 2008). Age and brain development are important factors to consider when discussing gang involvement. Youth are generally 11-15 years old when they join (Affolter, 2008). Youth want to create relationships with their peers and earn peer approval. It is difficult to assert that young children join gangs with the intent of becoming life-long criminals. Field research of gang life goes beyond the stereotypical characteristics of drugs and crime to make “clear that gang life does not always center on crime and violence” (Hughes, Pg 32, 2014) and that “gangs and gang members are in many respects quite ordinary” (Hughes, Pg 30, 2014). This research also indicates that a considerable amount of time is spent doing typical adolescent activities, such as just hanging out. It is perfectly normal for youth to look to their peers for approval, validation and social networking. It is unreasonable to punish a youth more harshly for being a gang member in communities where gang membership is common. It is how they create peer relationships, and typically happens during the stage of development when peer approval is crucial to the individual. It is unfair to assume that all gang members are seasoned criminals and should be punished as such, when in fact gangs are often like family. Interviews of gang members from across the country point to the social and family aspects of being in a gang. Their needs were not being met at home, so they looked outside. Many also discussed that being in a gang helped them develop self and cultural identities. Gangs were and still are a social and cultural outlet for young people facing racial inequity and discrimination. They have a deeper purpose than the stereotypes the mainstream media narrative perpetuates of intricate money-making crime syndicates. Gangs help foster culture and self-identity, regardless if that culture or identity is criminal or not. “The gang becomes, in many instances, the predominant agent of socialization in the community” (McCorkle, et.al, Pg 103, 2002). In this context, criminalizing youth who come from areas where gangs have a deep connection and history seems discriminatory. No doubt, money would be better spent on programs that foster youth identity and culture, and that provide engaging activities for youth, as well as social services for families that are struggling. Gang culture is rooted in community, and cannot be uprooted by suppression. A report written to the Washington State Legislature, “Findings and Recommendations of the Gangs in School Task Force”, asserts that the majority of youth who join gangs only stay for about one year, and many studies support this (Klein et.al, 2006). Scholars and ex-gang members agree that “Gang membership is relatively fleeting” (Maxson, Pg 105, 2014). The myth of “blood in, blood out” is false and, “Most street gangs are loosely structured, with transient leadership and membership, easily transcended codes of loyalty and informal rather than formal roles for members” (N., n.d.). A study of 800 Seattle youth by the Seattle Social Development Project found that 69% of the 124 who were in a gang were members for 1 year or less (Hawkin et al, 2001). Similar studies done in Denver, Colorado and Rochester, New York found almost identical outcomes. Youth grow up; we all change. Gangs can be seen more like social networks than bonded criminal organizations (Fleisher, 2006, Papachritos, 2006). With such often fleeting gang involvement, a more reasonable approach would provide vigorous and comprehensive support systems to youth. Another source of inequality is the disproportionate effect of gang suppression on youth of color. In his Ph.D thesis, D.R. Affolter points out “Street gangs composed of primarily white affiliates do exist, but are much less common than gangs primarily of Blacks or Hispanics” (Affolter, Pg 65, 2005). A 1996 study by the National Youth Gang Center found that 48% of gang members are Black, 43% are Hispanic, 5% are white and 4% are Asian (Jackson, 1999), and a more recent 2008 study by the National Youth Gang Survey concluded that 50% of gang members are Latino, 32% are Black and 11% are white. The majority of gang members are young men of color. Youth of color already have higher rates of contact with the law, and receive harsher sentencing for similar crimes compared to their white peers (Bernstein, 2014). They are arrested 3.5 times more frequently, are 3 times as likely to be referred to court, and almost 5 times as likely to be incarcerated compared to their white peers (Kakade, 2012). It would seem that gang suppression is systematically racist because it disproportionately affects youth of color, which serves to maintain the existing mass incarceration and criminality of people of color in the United States. Incarcerating gang members can often lead them further into gang life. Once in prison, gang members are generally segregated by their gang affiliation. Yakima County Jail segregates inmates by the individual's gang affiliation to reduce violence (Meyers, 2016), a common practice in most jails and prisons across the country. This often leads to stronger loyalties to their gangs than before, because you only are with your gang. Furthermore, going to prison often increases one’s respect from fellow gang members, according to gang experts. For example, the Yakima County gang unit prosecuting attorney, Troy Clements, stated “It’s college for them. They get street (credibility) and an understanding of gang politics”(Meyers, 2016). If the prosecuting attorney knows this to be true, why does he recommend longer sentences served in the company of fellow gang members as a way to increase community safety? It seems counter intuitive. One can conclude that sentencing gang members to longer prison terms does little to reduce gang crime, and that more creative strategies that actually work are needed. How can we explain the fear in which gangs are held by the general public that leads to these largely ineffective and costly punitive laws? If we look at the mainstream media, we can see how its negative portrayal of gangs and gang violence has greatly influenced the public's perception and understanding of the severity of the problem (McCorkle, et.al, 2002) . The media also tends to emphasize areas experiencing severe gang violence compared to the norm (N., n.d.), creating the illusion that gang violence is widespread. The methods by which media and law enforcement propagate negative stereotypes and images have been used for decades. During the 1940’s in the barrios of Los Angeles, Chicano youth, many of them children of immigrants, created their own identities within American culture. They were most easily recognized by their style of dress, zoot suits. They were called pachucos (Moreno, 2012). The pachuco zoot suits made it easy for these youth to be labeled and discriminated against. In 1942, a young Chicano was murdered, in what was rumored to be gang related. Known as the Sleepy Lagoon case, local law enforcement “cracked down” and arrested 22 gang members, 17 of whom were eventually convicted on different charges related to the murder. Radio stations and newspapers warned the public to be wary of the dangerous pachucos, hence creating a negative connotation for all zoot suiters. To many whites, zoot suiters became synonymous with gang members and bad people. The pachucos had a choice, abandon their identities and culture or risk being labeled a criminal. These media portrayals effectively created fear, heightened racial tensions and boxed zoot suiters into a false, negative stereotype. The same tactics are used today. Dress and style are continually used as a way to “identify” criminals or gang members, which is a form of profiling. A recent example is the murder of Trayvon Martin. Trayvon was a 17 year old Black boy who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch coordinator while walking home from a local store, presumably because of his ‘thug wear’(Rogers, 2012). His “thug wear” was a hoodie. Bill O’Reilly, among others, argued that Trayvon would still be alive had he not been wearing it. Popular views of gangs and gang members are often incorrect as a result of the mainstream media narrative. Today there are a number of shows depicting “gang life”, such as GangLand, Gang Related, The Wire, Narcos, Locked Up, etc. The media, by depicting negative images of gang members, has intensified the fear of gang crime and exaggerated the threat of gangs to society. Americans depend on the news to get accurate and reliable information about crime. However crime reporting tends to be misleading, discriminatory and credulous (McCorkle, et.al, 2012), and data collection differs greatly between law enforcement agencies. For example, most agencies track if a gang member commits a crime, as opposed to tracking if the crime was associated with gang membership. Gang crime is when the crime is committed in order to benefit the gang as a whole, which is different than individual gang members committing crimes. This distinction is essential to the collection of truthful and honest data. Also, most departments tracking gang activity generally only do so for violent crimes, while others don’t track any gang activity at all. This helps perpetuate the idea that all gang members are violent. “The stereotype is reflected in the recording practices” (Klein et.al, Pg 70, 2006). Lack of consistency can greatly impact outcomes and crime statistics. The mainstream narrative relentlessly pushes the threat of gangs and the images of heartless thugs. During a 2007 Senate hearing regarding the Gang Abatement and Prevention Act, gangs were referred to as a “crisis”, a “cancer”, and an “epidemic”. There was expert testimony stating that gangs are “terrorists”, “destroying neighborhoods”, and“crippling families”. This language is commonly used when the media and politicians discuss gangs, and inherently incites public anxiety. It has been found that “Fear of gangs is not simply a consequence of, or in direct relation to objective threat” (Klein, et.al, Pg 85, 2006). It doesn't matter where someone lives, or if they have experienced gang violence. People feel it to be a threat. The public believes there is a crime problem! There is a gang problem! Citizens express their concerns to their politicians. Politicians listen, create tough on crime policies and provide the illusion that they have done something to solve the gang problem. Nevertheless, research continues to prove that ‘tough on crime’ policies are ineffective and expensive. Section 3: Federal and State Efforts Historically, gangs have been under local and state jurisdiction because gangs are almost always, in essence, local to a specific geographical area or community. Senator Dianne Feinstein introduced the Gang Abatement and Prevention Act of 2007 to the United States Congress. This legislation was meant to balance prevention and suppression, but of the $1.1 billion proposed budget, $125 million was allocated for suppression and only $45 million was earmarked for prevention and intervention (Vuong et al, 2006). Its proposed definitions of gangs and gang crime could have been interpreted to allow a group of sports coaches to be federally prosecuted and convicted of a gang crime for participating in a betting pool. It also failed to use any of the best practices recommended by the Office of Juvenile Justice and Detention Prevention(OJJDP) Comprehensive Gang Model, which include community mobilization, social intervention, provision of opportunities, organizational change and development, and only at the last, suppression. In the OJJDP model, suppression is used to remove the most influential and dangerous gang members from the community, but not to blindly treat all gang members as such. The Gang Abatement and Prevention Act did not pass. However, suppression, the punitive culture towards gang members, expansion of laws and longer terms of incarceration continue to be prevalent in many states. Disregarding the abundant research proving the ineffectiveness of suppression, all 50 states have passed some form of legislation relating to gangs, and 32 states have gang sentencing enhancements (N., 2015). Washington State took similar suppressive action when House Bill 27-12 was signed into law by then governor Christine Gregoire in March of 2008. This legislation focuses primarily on suppression with less attention to intervention and prevention. In January of 2008, the Governor’s Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee, a committee comprised of governor appointees, released a policy brief about community-based gang prevention and intervention. The policy brief was in-depth, laid out effective strategies to address gang violence in Washington, and concluded that suppression, the most commonly used method, is also the least effective. It is clear from the research that suppression is inefficient and expensive (Klein et.al, 2006). If policymakers are concerned about citizen safety, it would be better to focus on community building and social services as opposed to suppression. Section 4: Case Study: Yakima In 2012, 16 year old Cesar Prado from Yakima, Washington was sentenced to 49 years in prison. He was convicted by a jury for Attempted First Degree Murder, Attempted Second Degree Murder and Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree. His convictions included firearms enhancements and gang sentencing aggravators. His case was originally in juvenile court, as he was 15 years old at the time of his arrest, but his case was transferred to the Superior Court and he was charged as an adult. He has maintained his plea of innocence. There is no DNA evidence linked to the case. In 2015 an appeal was filed, but all counts were denied. He is currently serving his sentence in Washington State Penitentiary in Walla Walla, Washington. He is 21 years old and has 45 more years to go. Cesar received a very harsh sentence. This can be attributed to a combination of social, political, and legal factors, among them Cesar’s affiliation to a local gang, his previous contact with the law, his being prosecuted in Yakima and his continued plea of innocence. Cesar did not take a plea bargain. Our criminal justice system favors plea bargains because it saves time and money for the courts. 95% of criminal cases end in plea bargains (Wan, 2007). Many legal academics agree that this is highly unconstitutional because defendants waive their rights to a fair trial. In 2013, Yakima Superior Court Judge David Elofson, (the same judge that sentenced Cesar) sentenced a 15 year old gang member to 20 years for second degree murder. This teenager murdered someone, pled guilty and got less than half the time Cesar did. It appears that defendants are sentenced more harshly for exercising their right to a trial. In addition, the locality in which a crime is committed substantially impacts the sentence (Boerner, 2012). Yakima’s politics, population, criminal justice system and culture had profound implications for Cesar’s sentence. Yakima is in the heart of central Washington, known for its apple production and agriculture (City of Yakima, n.d.). Its large agricultural industry has attracted a large concentration of Latinos and Chicanos to live and work there. According to the US census of 2010, 41.3% of Yakima city's population was Latino, compared to 16.3% of the total U.S. population. Yakima is also well known for its problems with crime and gangs. In 2014, Time Magazine ranked Yakima second in the nation for cities citizens feared to live in. Yakima earned this rank partly on the basis of the following statistics: a violent crime rate of 394.4 per 100,000 people and a 23.1% poverty rate. Racism is also embedded in Yakima’s history. The Ku Klux Klan and other white vigilante groups were very open and active during the early 1900’s in Yakima County(Griffey, 2007). Many whites felt disdain for the Japanese and Black agricultural workers who were “stealing” their jobs. On multiple occasions, white residents led violent attacks against non-whites and forced them to move out of the area. These racist attitudes, though not as open or extreme, are still very much alive today, as witnessed by the physical segregation of the city. To this day, almost ¾ of the Latino population lives east of 16th Avenue, which basically divides the city (La Ganga, 2016). The local politics and politicians have a history of racist sentiments as well. Just recently in 2008, then Mayor Dave Edler said in a speech “I don’t want to vote for new schools so those Mexicans will have nice schools”(La Ganga, 2016). It would seem that any elected official who openly shares such prejudices knows that many in the community have similar values. Racism has played a role in the political practices of the city as well. In 2012, the City of Yakima was sued by the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) due to existing voting practices which deprived Latino voters of fair representation in the City Council. In a city where nearly half the population was Latino, a Latino City Council member had not yet been elected into office. The case, “Montes vs. City of Yakima,” went to Federal Court. Thomas Rice, the presiding judge, determined that “Latino voters are inherently disadvantaged by the framework of the current system”, and that “the non-Latino majority in Yakima routinely suffocates the voting preferences of the Latino minority.” Judge Rice ruled in favor of the ACLU. Though the City Council attempted to appeal the case, it was later dropped due to rising legal costs. The City of Yakima’s total bill was $3,013,566 for attorney fees and payments to the ACLU (Faulk, 2016). That City Council chose to spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars to protect their existing biased voting practices rather than let the Latino population of the City have access to fair representation in the City Council. This is just one recent instance of racism in Yakima’s local politics. Lastly, in regards to Cesar’s case, the Yakima County Superior Court and the presiding judge of Cesar’s case, Judge David Elofson, disproportionately use gang sentencing enhancements compared to the rest of the state. According to data requested from the Washington State Caseload Forecast Council, nineteen people have been given gang sentencing enhancements since 2011. Eleven of the nineteen were sentenced by the Yakima Superior Court and five of those nineteen were sentenced by Judge Elofson representing 26% of the entire state's gang enhancement sentences. The Yakima Superior Court has used gang sentencing enhancements more than any other county in the state. Reports by the Vera Project concluded that the average cost of housing an inmate in Washington State is a little over fifty thousand dollars a year. If all five of those sentenced by Judge Elofson with gang enhancements serve their sentences in their entirety, it will cost the state and taxpayers $13,783,333. That’s over 13 million dollars, not including the costs of inflation. If Cesar is to serve the remaining years of his sentence, it will cost the state and the taxpayers $2,250,000, not accounting for inflation. Does anyone doubt this money could be better spent investing in research-based effective programs that build community and provide opportunities, instead of incarcerating people? If Cesar had been charged in a different county, pled guilty regardless of innocence, and was not Latino, his sentence would most likely have been much shorter. Yakima has attempted to address the gang issue in different ways, mostly through suppression. In 2011, a juvenile gang court was created (Hanh et al, 2012). This specialized court allowed juveniles eligible for deferred disposition the opportunity to go through a 4 step intensive process where charges for low level offenses would be dropped upon completion. The program is designed to provide services to juveniles, like access to education, mentoring, substance abuse treatment, mental health counseling and other opportunities to build useful skills. The hope was that with the right tools, the youth would be able to leave gang life. Nearly five years after its implementation, Yakima’s juvenile gang court has not been as successful as hoped. It seems juveniles eligible for gang court would rather be incarcerated for short periods of time or on probation rather than keep up with the stringent requirements set by the judge of the juvenile gang court for 12-24 months (Morey, 2016). However good intentioned, the juvenile gang court has not produced the intended outcomes. Shortly after the Washington State Legislature passed HB 27-12, the Yakima Police Department applied for a grant that would fund their own specialized gang unit. In 2009, the Gang Enforcement Team of Yakima County was created and included officers from several different cities (Russell, 2009). There is also a gang hotline where residents can anonymously report anything related to gang activity, gang members or gang crime. The Superior Court of Yakima also has a gang unit with two prosecuting attorneys who handle all aspects of criminal prosecution of gang members. Recently, Prosecuting Attorney Troy Clements said that Yakima gangs are focusing on drug dealing and theft as opposed to drive-by shootings and violence (Meyers, 2016). Attorney Clements says that gangs are becoming more organized. For this reason, the gang unit has has been working with the federal government in hopes of prosecuting gang members in federal courts where sentences are stiffer. The Yakima Police Department also implements the G.R.E.A.T. program, (Gang Resistance Education and Training) in local Yakima schools. This program is very similar to the D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) from the early 1980’s . Local officers follow a set curriculum in middle and elementary schools. The G.R.E.A.T. program has two main goals; 1. Help youth gain the skills to avoid gang membership, criminal activity and violence, and 2. Help youth develop healthy relationships with law enforcement. A program evaluation determined that there was a 39% reduction in the probability of a student joining a gang one year post program (Esbensen et.al, 2014). Nationally, this kind of program is often the only form of prevention practiced by law enforcement (Webb et al, 2012). In Yakima, the police department has also instituted another preventive measure, the Yakima Police Activities League. The league's main purpose is to provide pro-social activities for children and their families. The City of Yakima also developed the Gang Free Initiative in 2012. The mission; “engage the community to develop suppression, prevention and intervention strategies that support and promote positive youth development”. This comprehensive plan could be effective if implemented, but many projects have not been completed. The plan also requires leadership and cohesion which it seems to lack. For example, in 2015 after only 8 months at the job, Perry Tarrant resigned as manager of the Gang Free Initiative for a position with the Seattle Police Department (Engel, 2016). Tarrant’s position was never filled and no longer exists. One positive result of the Gang Free Initiative is the Youth and Family Development Center, which offers a variety of social and educational services to youth and the community. Though Yakima may have attempted to balance suppression, intervention and prevention strategies, suppression is still the most commonly practiced and heavily funded. The preliminary budget of 2017 for Yakima’s general fund, which is 76.3 million dollars, pays for a wide range of entities such as the police, fire department, parks, administrators, street lights etc (Moore,2016). The biggest expenditure from the general fund is the police department at 36.4%, or 27.7 million dollars. The fire department’s budget is 17.1%. No other single department uses more than 7.2% of the general fund and most departments are below 3%. Additionally, in 1992 Yakima County voters approved a .1% criminal justice sales tax, which is projected to raise $1,401,480 in revenue in 2017 for the City of Yakima. In 2004, Yakima County voters approved an additional .3% sales tax and then renewed it in 2015, effective until 2022. That tax is projected to make $2,551,300 in 2017 for the City of Yakima. It has already, in 2015, raised $3,260,050 and is projected to raise $3,361,500 by the end of 2016. The County as a whole raises approximately 9.9 million dollars annually, which is distributed to different agencies throughout the county (Daily Sun, 2015). The revenue from the sales tax goes to fund a variety of expenses, including police salaries, attorney salaries, and administrative costs. The Yakima Police Department also receives additional funding from federal grants. This spending is justified because community safety is a priority of local government. “Despite a 66% reduction in crime per capita since 1988, concern over random acts of gang violence, property crime, and auto theft continue to generate significant community angst about public safety in Yakima. Respondents to the 2015 Yakima Citizen Survey identified public safety as the top priority for Yakima in the coming years” (Moore, 2016). After researching the methods used to conduct the Yakima Citizen Survey, its findings seem less conclusive. The 2015 Yakima Citizen Survey was sent to 3,000 different households randomly selected across each district of the city. Of the 3,000 that were sent out, only 735 were returned. The population of Yakima is around 90,000 people. 735 returned surveys cannot accurately represent Yakima’s population as a whole. Also, one must consider the demographics of those who took the time to complete and return the survey. It is easy for data to misrepresent or mislead people. Government officials should consider this when creating policies or planning budgets around survey opinions. Research suggests that people would be safer if government officials focused on community building versus suppressing crime (Klein et al, 2006). Scholars would argue that funding is better spent on investing in the community as opposed to spending on law enforcement and incarceration. Yakima spends a great deal on criminal justice, suppression and law enforcement. However, crime statistics suggest that the citizens are not getting their money’s worth as crime is still a problem in Yakima. According to crime statistics from the City of Yakima’s police department website, there was a reduction in crime between 2012-2014 in robberies, aggravated assault, homicide, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and forcible rape. The only increase between those years was arson, which more than doubled from 2012-2014. The Yakima police department has yet to provide crime rate statistics for 2015 on their website. But every year the FBI releases the Uniform Crime Report, which details all reported violent crimes, murders, rapes, robberies, aggravated assaults, property crimes, burglaries, larceny thefts, motor vehicle thefts and arsons in every city in the United States. According to the 2015 report, the City of Yakima’s crime rate increased (Meyers, 2016). Violent crime increased by 25.7%, burglaries were up 20.2% , and property crime was up by 10.1%. As of late November 2016, the City of Yakima has had 12 homicides, the highest since 2010. Six homicides occurred in the span of two weeks between late October to early November 2016. None were related, and four of the six were said to be domestic violence. Mike Bastinelli, the Yakima Police spokesman stated, “But random attacks are not happening. If you are involved with drug activity, or if you’re involved in a violent relationship, or if you’re involved with any type of criminal activity, you should be worried…..(but) average persons are not being targeted” (Iracheta,2016). Captain Jeff Schneider of the Yakima police department commented that extra police patrols would not help stop these types of homicides. “It’s not going to stop a husband from killing his wife”. When it comes to domestic violence, the police department recommends that the City look towards social services to address the issue, as the police will not be helpful. As for gang crime, it was not until 2012 that law enforcement agencies in Washington State were required to track that certain offenses (Murder and Non-Negligent Manslaughter, Manslaughter by Negligence, Kidnapping/Abduction, Robbery, Rape, Sodomy, Sexual Assault with an Object, Fondling, Aggravated Assault, Simple Assault and Intimidation) were committed by a gang member. Law agencies do not track if the crime was committed in order to benefit a gang, which is how gang members receive sentence enhancements. They track if the person committing the crime is a gang member. The Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) uses the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NRIBS) to track these offenses from all law enforcement agencies in the state. The chart below shows the total number of the aforementioned offenses reported in the City of Yakima between the years of 2013-2015. The following chart shows how many offenses were committed by gang members, juvenile gang members and non-gang members/unknown in the City Yakima. There is a huge discrepancy. Gang members are committing a tiny percentage of these serious crimes in Yakima. Over the three years, the number of gang members committing these crimes has stayed relatively constant , while the non-gang members shows a small increase. Unfortunately, the WASPC will not be able to provide crime data for 2016 until spring of 2017. Data from Yakima County shows similar trends. Yakima County includes the following law enforcement agencies; Yakima County Sheriff's Office, Grandview PD,Sunnyside PD, Toppenish PD, Union Gap PD, Yakima PD, Zillah PD, Granger PD, Mabton PD, Selah PD, Wapato PD, and Moxee PD. Again, there is a major discrepancy in the number of gang members committing these offenses compared to non-gang members. The data collected on these 11 serious offenses shows that gang members are barely contributing to these violent crimes. It is hard to definitively say based on just these statistics if gang crime has increased or decreased because data has not been tracked or collected for many years. Also, only violent crimes have been tracked. In order to gain a better understanding of the local gang crime, tracking additional crimes such as distributing drugs, graffiti and burglary would paint a better picture of what crimes gang members are committing. However, according to this data the number of gang members committing crimes has remained low and relatively stagnant. In Yakima, gang members are not the main problem. The data collected by the WASPC proves gang members are committing a tiny fraction of the most serious crimes, and that non-gang members are responsible for the majority of serious crimes in Yakima . Statistics show that crime in Yakima is up, but gang members are not responsible for the bulk of the crimes. This is not to belittle the issue of violence in a community, but an attempt to shed light on the underlying causes. In the heart of California, the City of Salinas is experiencing violence at a higher rate than Yakima. Yakima and Salinas have several important similarities. Salinas is known for its agriculture, the salad bowl of California. Three quarters of the population is Chicano (Magdaleno,2016). In 2014, Salinas introduced a 1 cent sales tax increase to fund police and other anti-gang projects. The Monterey County (Salinas’county), Gang Task Force also has worked with the FBI to investigate and prosecute gang members. These cities are similar in size . Salinas is 23.33 square miles, Yakima is 27.69. Both cities have high rates of poverty, 20.2% for Salinas. Salinas and Yakima police departments lack Latino officers, meaning their police force does not represent the community they serve. Salinas is also known for its connection to the Nuestra Familia, a heavily organized prison gang with ties to the streets. In early 2016, Salinas experienced 6 shootings within 6 days (Adami,2016). In response to the shootings Salinas Police Commander Stan Cooper said, “The average person walking around and going about their daily business does not fall victim to gun violence. The average person walking about doesn’t even witness gun violence”. This sounds very much like what the Yakima Police spokesmen stated after the series of murders that occurred in Yakima in late October and early November of 2016. Furthermore, Salinas Police Chief Kelly McMillin stated “There’s a broad spectrum of violence going on right now…. There’s an increase in family, domestic violence.” This also is almost identical to the statements of the Yakima police. The Salinas Police department, like the Yakima Police Department, recommends that the city invest in more programs for domestic violence prevention and other social services like drug rehabilitation. Salinas is now, and has been the youth murder capital of California four out of the last five years (Magdaleno,2016). Salinas and (Statistics taken from the 2015 FBI Uniformed Crime Report) Yakima are quite comparable, and both are experiencing higher violent crime rates compared to the rest of the country. There are several factors that could lead these two similar cities to experience such high violent crime rates. Both cities share high rates of poverty, which often coincide with high crime rates. Both cities are heavily influenced by the agricultural industry, which attracts many migrant workers to the area who generally lack political representation and legal protection. These two cities are racially and socioeconomically segregated. Both cities have invested in suppression with little success in reducing crime. It is a fair assumption that these high crime rates will continue unless investments are made in the community, creating jobs, education and social services instead of suppressive policies and policing. It seems the police from Salinas and Yakima agree that their cities would benefit and crime would likely go down if social programs and services were better funded. Gangs are not just criminal problems to be solved by the police and courts. We cannot arrest our way out of the “gang problem”. Gangs historically have arisen as a response to the subpar living conditions within specific communities. The National Gang Center reports that “ultimately, this descriptive characteristic of the gang problem is best regarded as a reflection of the social and economic inequalities that persist across the United States” (N., n.d.). There is a reason these cities are experiencing high crime rates, and it is not because more criminals live there. It is because the citizens’ needs are not being met. These two cities both would most likely be healthier and safer if resources were spent on strengthening the community, not criminalizing and incarcerating individuals. As a case in point, let us consider the Yakima’s City Council’s current plan for a project called The Yakima Central Plaza. The Plaza would be a promenade in the heart of the downtown Yakima area. If the Plaza is built, there will be a stage for events, a market hall, outdoor seating, play areas for children and water fountains. According to the Yakima Central Plaza website, the Plaza will be “The most transformative enhancement in Downtown Yakima for the next century.” The Plaza is estimated to cost around 12 million dollars. The city agreed to pay no more than 3 million and to fundraise the additional cost through private donations. The 3 million would come from loans and bonds, which would be paid back over 20 years. As of November 2016, 52 private donors have pledged 5.2 million dollars. The Plaza is said to be an opportunity for economic and community development, but for whom? Who will benefit from the Plaza being built? Will those living in poverty have more job opportunities? Will local citizens help build it? Or will this Plaza further segregate and divide the town while simultaneously increasing the wealth inequality gap? In theory, the Plaza is a great idea, but the City is experiencing high poverty and crime rates. The east side of the town is struggling. Is a new plaza the best way to spend the City’s money? Some believe that the Plaza will perpetuate the historical racial, social and economic inequalities that have shaped Yakima (Faulk, 2016). The City and County of Yakima have taken many steps to address the issue of crime and gangs in their jurisdiction. Though crime has dropped since the 1980’s, Yakima still has higher rates of crime compared to the State and the Country. Yakima’s violent crime rate was 547.9 per 100,00 residents, while Washington State’s was 284.4 per 100,00 and nationally it was 383.2 per 100,00 (Meyers, 2016). The City of Yakima has already had 12 homicides in 2016, which is nearly double that of 2015. Policing and incarcerating people are reactive strategies. There is a belief that having more police on the streets, harsher sentencing and more people in prison reduces crime. The United States has a higher rate of incarceration than any other country in the world, 693 per 100,00 people (Wagner et. al, 2016). The current system justifies its expenditures for high incarceration rates with the expectation of reducing crime. But it simply doesn’t work. If it did, there would be little to no crime. It is time for proactive solutions. Again, let us consider the recent ‘bait car’ program the Yakima Police Department is using which sets decoy cars on the street for people to steal (Morey, 2016). In 2015, Yakima experienced the most auto thefts in the State. Ryan Yates, the auto theft detective for the Yakima Police Department, states that “Most car theft in Yakima tends to be a crime of opportunity… Yakima’s criminals often use their stolen cars as something of a taxi service- abandoning the car once they have made it to their destination”. Yates also mentioned that most victims’ cars are returned with little to no damage with maybe a missing stereo. The majority of the cars being stolen are not being ripped apart and sold for parts, but are being used for transportation. A proactive solution to the problem would be investing in public transportation, or creating other opportunities for transportation throughout the city. The bait car program is a reactive solution to the city's ongoing auto theft problem. The City has chosen to spend money to hoax people into stealing a car, criminally prosecute them, send them to jail, label them as a criminal for the rest of their lives, and, as a result, limit further opportunities for employment, housing, healthcare and education, thereby continuing the cycles of criminality and poverty. So, has Yakima’s crime rate significantly decreased since 2008 and the passing of HB 27-12? The answer is a resounding No, and there is no pattern suggesting that 2016 will be any different. The most recent data shows that overall crime rates have increased from 2014-2015 in the City of Yakima. Yakima’s violent crime rate increased by 25.7%, property crime is up 10.1%, and burglaries increased by 20.2%. Yakima County also experienced an increase of 10.3% in violent crimes and a 4.1% increase in property crimes from 2014-2015. Crime and gang crime in Yakima are not going to be reduced by punishing individuals and sending them to prison. In 2012, the Yakima County Gang Commission released the ‘Yakima County Gang Assessment’. The OJJDP’s Comprehensive Gang Model includes a community assessment which is “based on data, not anecdote” (OJJDP, Pg 26, 2012) so that the root of the problem can be identified and properly addressed. Following the guidelines from OJJDP, the ‘Yakima County Gang Assessment’ was able to uncover important key findings. First, Yakima County’s high poverty rate is one of several risk factors that contribute to gang involvement. In fact, the majority of the local gang members interviewed reported that poverty was a major contributing factor to joining a gang (‘Yakima County Gang Assessment, 2012). Other factors included the high number of families with single parents, low educational attainment for adults, and high rates of seasonal unemployment. The assessment also found that Yakima County youth have higher rates of school failure, depression, teen pregnancy, suicide and suicide attempts, alcohol and drug use. Many don’t feel safe in school and have less connection to their communities compared to the rest of the state. Furthermore, the lack of uniform and consistent tracking of gang activity and gang crime throughout the County made it difficult to truly assess the gang problem. Lastly, “It is important to note that undercurrents of anger and ethnic conflict were found in answers to several of the open ended questions in the surveys that were conducted” (‘Yakima County Gang Assessment’,Pg 142, 2012). The gang assessment for Yakima County identifies many factors that contribute to why youth join gangs. Yet Yakima continues to rely on suppression as a way to fight crime and gangs. The evidence is being overlooked, massive amounts of money is being spent on fruitless efforts, peoples’ lives are being ruined, and the community continues to suffer. Yakima, like most places in the country, continues to address the issue of crime and gangs in the City and County with policies and actions that appear to be misguided. Yakima would be better off if it would: 1. Invest in the community 2. Create long term- liveable wage jobs for more people 3. Work to desegregate the city 4. Create culturally competent curriculum giving Chicana/o, Latina/o students opportunities to learn about their history and to develop self identity within their culture 5. Create after-school and weekend clubs (sports, culture, drama, band, politics, cooking, life skills) for youth. 6. Provide job training for students in school 7. Train officers, public officials, teachers, judges, etc in cultural competency, and test for implicit bias 8. Provide free counseling (mental health, drug and alcohol, family) for residents 9. Keep kids in school 10. Work to reduce crime, not end gangs Section 6: Conclusion This paper was meant to debunk myths many people have about gangs. The public needs to know that: 1.Suppression does not work. It is ineffective, expensive and does little to reduce crime. 2. Gang members are people just like you or me. 3.Education and job opportunities, not incarceration, are more effective strategies. 4. Gangs are a response to social and economic inequalities. 5.Gangs are not just a criminal problem. 6.It is unfair to just blame individual gang members. 7.Society has played a role in the creation and continuation of gangs in America. Gangs aren’t inherently bad, and neither are gang members. There are solutions to gang violence and gangs. However, it is easier to punish and blame individuals than address the underlying societal issues that are at the root of the problem. We pay police to chase young people from impoverished areas to arrest them. We pay for judges to sentence them. We pay for prisons to incarcerate them. And we pay for politicians to create and pass laws, which have done little to solve the problem. We invest so much to react to crime, but invest little to prevent it. If our criminal justice system actually helped reduce crime, there would be less of it. If suppression worked, there would be less crime, and less gangs. Albert Einstein said, “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”, yet we continue to do the same thing over and over. There is an us (non-gang members) versus them (gang members) mentality. We must realize that there is no us versus them, there is only us. Gang members, more often than not, are a marginalized people. Father Greg Boyle said that “He never met a hopeful kid who joined a gang”. Positive change will not come from incarcerating or isolating them. Positive change will come from treating them with the same respect every human being deserves. I have no gang relations, nor have I been a victim of gang violence. But I do know gang members, and there is much more to them than their gang affiliation. They inspired me to write this paper. Conducting the research for this paper led me to read countless articles, studies, books, reports etc. Most lacked the perspective of current or ex-gang members. Transcripts from Congressional hearings included testimony from police gang experts, victims of gang violence, and politicians, but none from current or ex-gang members. Current or ex-gang members are left out of the conversation. Their voices are seldom heard. In conclusion, many hold the belief that the individual is to blame and that society did not contribute to the problem of gangs and gang violence. This is false. Gangs are a response to social, racial and economic inequalities, and we will never arrest and jail our way out of this problem. Works Cited About Yakima. (n.d.). Retrieved October 24, 2016, from https://www.yakimawa.gov/visit/about/ Adami, Chelcey. "2016 in Salinas: 6 Days, 6 Shootings." The Californian. USA Today Network, 8 Jan. 2016. Web. 26 Nov. 2016. Affolter, D. R. (2005). Gangsters Behind Bars: An In-Depth Inquiry Into Gangs In The Washington State Penitentiary (Unpublished master's thesis). Whitman College. Anders, A. (Director), & Anders, A. (Writer). (1994). Mi vida loca [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Sony Pictures Classics. Beckman, M. (2004). Crime, Culpability, and the Adolescent Brain. Science, 305(5684), 596-599. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/3837331 Bell, J., & Nicole Lim. (2005). Young Once, Indian Forever: Youth Gangs in Indian Country. American Indian Quarterly, 29(3/4), 626-650. Retrieved November 05, 2016 http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/4138993 Bernstein, N. (2014). Burning down the house: the end of juvenile prison. New York: The New Press. Boerner, D. (2012, August). Prosecution in Washington State. Crime and Justice No. 1 Prosecutors and Politics: A Comparative Perspective, 41, 167-210. Retrieved August 30, 2016, from http://www.jstor.org/stab;e/10.1086/665411 Boyle, G. (2010). Tattoos on the Heart, The Power of Boundless Compassion. New York, NY: Free Press. Braga, A. A. (2014). Focused Deterrence Strategies and the Reduction of Gang and Group-Involved Violence. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 475-488). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Colverwell, Wendy. "Kennewick Councilman's Anti-Latino Comments Draw Community Ire." Tri-City Herald. N.p., 25 Mar. 2016. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Criminal Justice Tax Will be Back on the Ballot. (2015, July 30). Daily Sun. Retrieved December 7, 2016, from http://www.dailysunnews.com/news/2015/jul/30/criminal-justice-tax-will-be-back-ballot/ DeCruz, Rachael. Washington: Facing Race, 2012 Legislative Report Card on Racial Equity. N.p., 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Delpilar, Jackie. "Yakima City Council Drops Appeal of ACLU Voting Rights Lawsuit." The Yakima Herald. N.p., 5 Apr. 2016. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Dudley, W., & Gerdes, L. I. (Eds.). (2005). Opposing Viewpoints: Gangs. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press. Duran, R. J. (2014). Legitimated Oppression: Inner-City Mexican American Experiences with Police Gang Enforcement. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 253-268). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Engel, S. (Writer). (2014, June 2). Yakima teen sentenced to 20 years in prison in murder case [Television broadcast]. In KIMAtv.com. CBS. Retrieved November 06, 2016, from http://kimatv.com/news/local/yakima-teen-sentenced-to-20-years-in-prison-in-murder-case Engel, S.(Writer). (2015,March 11). Yakima gang prevention head to join Seattle police department [Television broadcast]. In KIMAtv.com. CBS. Retrieved November 06, 2016, from http://kimatv.com/news/videos/yakima-gang-prevention-head-to-join-seattle-police-department Egley, A., Jr., Logan, J., & McDaniel, D. (2012, January 27). Gang Homicides- Five U.S. Cities, 2003-2008. Morbidty and Mortality Weekly Report, 61(03), 46-51. Retrieved December 10, 2016, from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6103a2.htm Esbensen, F., Peterson, D., Taylor, T. J., & Osgood, D. (2014). Is G.R.E.A.T. Effective? Results from the National Evaluation of the Gang Resistance Education and Training (G.R.E.A.T.) Program. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 443-450). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Faulk, Mike. "Plaza Spurs Talk of Social Inequality." The Yakima Herald. N.p., 9 Mar. 2016. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Gebo, E., & Bond, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Looking Beyond Suppression. Plymouth, United Kingdom: Lexington Books. Griffey, Trevor. "The Ku Klux Klan and Vigilante Culture in Yakima Valley." Seattle Civil Rights & Labor History Project. University of Washington, 2007. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Hackford, T. (Director). (1993). Blood in--blood out: Bound by honor [Motion picture]. United States: Hollywood Pictures. Hagedorn, J. M. (2014). Gangs, Neighborhoods, and Public Policy. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 344-352). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hahn, S. L., & Berndt, R. (2012, May). Gang Court Yakima County, Washington (Rep.). Retrieved November 21, 2016, from http://www-test.ospi.k12.wa.us/safetycenter/Gangs/pubdocs/2012June/GangCourtYakimaCounty SummaryReport.pdf Hendrichson, Christine, and Ruth Delaney. The Price of Prisons What Incarceration Costs Taxpayers. Rep. Vera Institute of Justice. N.p.: n.p., 2012. Print. Hughes, L. A. (2014). Studying Youth Gangs: Alternative Methods and Conclusions. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 27-40). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Howell, J. C., Egley, A., Jr., Tita, G. E., & Griffiths, E. (2014). Gang Problem Prevalence Trends in the U.S. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 55-60). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Howell,J. C. (2010, December). Gang Prevention: An Overview of Research and Programs. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ojjdp/231116.pdf Institute for Intergovernmental Research (IIR) for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). (n.d.). Gang Resistance And Training. Retrieved November 22, 2016, from https://www.great-online.org/GREAT-Home Iracheta, M. (2016, November 7). Authorities say recent spate of Yakima homicides are isolated incidents. The Yakima Herald. Retrieved November 28, 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/crime_and_courts/authorities-say-recent-spate-of-yakima-h omicides-are-isolated-incidents/article_70d27edc-a588-11e6-9e40-0f30bb2c27d6.html Jackman, T. (2016, June 22). Study finds police officers arrested 1,100 times per year, or 3 per day, nationwide. The Washington Post. Retrieved December 20, 2016, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/22/study-finds-1100-police-offic ers-per-year-or-3-per-day-are-arrested-nationwide/?utm_term=.4c11beca2b76 Jackson, L. (1999, August). Understanding and Responding to Youth Gangs: A Juvenile Corrections Approach [Abstract]. Corrections Today, 61(5), 62-112. Retrieved September 06, 2016, from https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=178206. Kakade, M., & et. al (2012). Adolescent Substance Use and Other Illegal Behaviors and Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice System Involvement: Findings From a US National Survey. American Journal of Public Health, 102(7). Retrieved May 17, 2016, from http:// www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3477985/ Kelly, M. (2000). Inequality and Crime. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 82(4), 530-539. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/2646649 Klein, M. W. (1999). The American Street Gang, Its Nature, Prevalence, and Control. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (2006). Street Gang Patterns and Policies. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Klein, M. W., & Maxson, C. L. (2014). A Brief Review of the Definitional Problem. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 3-7). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. La Ganga, Maria L. "Yakima Valley Latinos Getting a Voice, With Court's Help." LA Times. N.p., 25 Sept. 2014. Web. 29 Nov. 2016. Lapczynski, K. Washington Association of Police Chiefs and Sheriffs (2016, October 14). [2012-2015 Gang Activity]. Unpublished raw data. Larsons, A. (2016, April 5). Inside Salinas Violent Crime. KSBW. Retrieved November 26, 2016, from http://www.ksbw.com/article/inside-salinas-violent-crime/1296851 Ludwig, J., Duncan, G., & Hirschfield, P. (2001). Urban Poverty and Juvenile Crime: Evidence from a Randomized Housing-Mobility Experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(2), 655-679. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/2696475 Luu, D. (2016, November 21). The Washington State Caseload Forecast Council [Exceptional Gang FY2000- FY2016]. Unpublished raw data. Lynn, A. (2014, November 24). Tacoma teenager sees sentence reduced in fatal robbery. The News Tribune. Retrieved November 05, 2016, from http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/local/crime/article46342325.html Magdaleno, J. (2016, July 27). Welcome to the Youth Murder Capital of California. Vice News. Retrieved November 26, 2016, from https://news.vice.com/article/salinas-the-youth-murder-capital-of-california Maxson, C. L., Egley, A., Jr., Miller, J., & Klein, M. W. (Eds.). (2014). The Modern Gang Reader (Vol. 4). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Maxson, C. L. (2014). Gang Members on the Move. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 61-73). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. McCorkle, R. C., & Miethe, T. D. (2002). Panic: The Social Construction of the Street Gang Problem. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. McShane, M. D., & Williams, F. P. (1996). Encyclopedia of American prisons. New York: Garland Pub. Meehan, A. (2000). The Organizational Career of Gang Statistics: The Politics of Policing Gangs. The Sociological Quarterly, 41(3), 337-370. Retrieved November 06, 2016 http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/4121381 Meyers, D. W. (2016, February 2). As Gangs Evolve, Law Enforcement Shifts Gears. The Yakima Herald. Retrieved August 3, 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/local/as-gangs-evolve-law-enforcement-shifts-gears/article_ 004d44fe-d869-11e5-916c-fbcf0be5e46f.html#comments Meyers, D. W. (2016, September 26) FBI Crime Statistics Show Yakimas Crime Rates Increased in 2015."The Yakima Herald. Retrieved 26 Nov. 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/crime_and_courts/fbi-crime-statistics-show-yakima-s-crime -rates-increased-in/article_09880f02-8432-11e6-80dc-5b474c3835e2.html Meyers, D. W. (2016, October 16). Yakima County jail uses segregation methods to keep gang violence down. The Yakima Herald. Retrieved November 15, 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/crime_and_courts/yakima-county-jail-uses-segregation-met hods-to-keep-gang-violence/article_2abab890-9432-11e6-a6b2-4fed3d82c0da.html Morales, G. C., & Gagliardi, J. F. (n.d.). Gangster's paradise: Gangs in the Pacific Northwest. Moreno, E. (2004). Mexican American Gangs, Migration, And Ethnic Identity in Eastern Washington, 1994-2004 (Unpublished master's thesis). Washington State University. Morey, M. (2016, October 28). Yakima’s Community Diversion Program offers a second chance. The Yakima Herald. Retrieved November 21, 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/crime_and_courts/yakima-s-community-diversion-program- offers-a-second-chance/article_5d91a44c-9cd7-11e6-afa1-679374db5568.html Morey, M. (2016, December 3). Yakima Police use 'bait car' in effort to target thieves. The Yakima Herald. Retrieved December 13, 2016, from http://www.yakimaherald.com/news/crime_and_courts/yakima-police-use-bait-car-in-effort-to-ta rget-thieves/article_befc0d76-b9e7-11e6-a66b-2748f31d6d4d.html N. (n.d.). Frequently Asked Questions About Gangs. Retrieved December 11, 2016, from https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/About/FAQ Highlights of Gang Related Legislation. (2015, December). Retrieved November 12, 2016, from https://www.nationalgangcenter.gov/Legislation/Highlights Neyer, C. (1994, September 6). `A Good Gang' For Urban Boys Scouts Offer Alternative To The Streets. Hartford Courant. Retrieved December 19, 2016, from http://articles.courant.com/1994-09-06/news/9409060072_1_troop-hartford-boy-scouts-badge Olmos, E. J. (Director), Olmos, E. J. (Producer), & Mutrux, F., & Nakano, D. (Writers). (1992). American me [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Universal Pictures. Peralta, S. (Director). (2007). Crips and Bloods: Made in America [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Bullfrog Films. Reynolds, Julia. "What's behind the Salinas Homicide Rate?" The Mercury News. N.p., 28 Dec. 2015. Web. 26 Nov. 2016. Rogers, A. (2012, July 13). Now Geraldo Rivera is Blaming Chicago's Murder Spike on 'Thug Wear' Business Insider. Retrieved December 11, 2016. Russell, C. (2009, January 8). Sunnyside on board with proposed Yakima Valley gang task force. The Daily Sun. Retrieved November 22, 2016, from http://www.dailysunnews.com/news/2009/jan/08/sunnyside-on-board-with-proposed-yakima-val ley/ Schmidt, L. M., & O'Reily, J. T. (2007). Gangs and Law Enforcement, A Guide for Dealing with Gang-Related Violence. Springfield, Illinois: Thomas Publisher. Scott, E., & Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescent Development and the Regulation of Youth Crime. The Future of Children, 18(2), 15-33. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/20179977 Spergel, I. A., Wa, K., & Sosa, R. V. (2014). The Comprehensive, Community-Wide Gang Program Model: Success and Failure. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 451-466). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Steinberg, L. (2007). Risk Taking in Adolescence: New Perspectives from Brain and Behavioral Science. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 55-59. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/20183162 The National Citizen Survey Yakima, Wa, Technical Appendices 2015 [Pdf]. (2015). Boulder: National Research Center In. The United States, Gangs in Schools Task Force, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction. (n.d.). Findings and Recommendations of the Gangs in School Task Force. Tymula, A., Belmaker, L., Roy, A., Ruderman, L., Manson, K., Glimcher, P., & Levy, I. (2012). Adolescents' risk-taking behavior is driven by tolerance to ambiguity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(42), 17135-17140. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.evergreen.idm.oclc.org/stable/41763498 U.S.Cong., Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness Committee. (n.d.). [Cong. Bill from 62nd Legislature Cong., 2011 Regular Session sess.]. United States. City of Yakima. Office of the City Manager. 2017 Proposed Preliminary Budget Summary. By Cliff Moore. N.p., 18 Oct. 2016. Web. 22 Nov. 2016. Valdez, L. (Director), & Valdez, L. (Writer). (1981). Zoot suit [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Universial Pictures. Vertinsky, L. (1999). A Law and Economic Approach to Criminal Street Gangs. Brookfield, Vermont: Ashgate Publishing. Voung, L., & Silvia, F. (2008). Evaluating Federal Gang Bills (Rep.). Retrieved November 16, 2016, from http://www.nccdglobal.org/sites/default/files/publication_pdf/special-report-gang-bills.pdf Wan, T. (2007). THE UNNECESSARY EVIL OF PLEA BARGAINING: AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL CONDITIONS PROBLEM AND A NOT-SO-LEAST RESTRICTIVE ALTERNATIVE. REVIEW OF LAW AND SOCIAL JUSTICE, 17:1. Retrieved November 06, 2016, from http://weblaw.usc.edu/why/students/orgs/rlsj/assets/docs/issue_17/07_Wan_Macr Watkins, C. (2007). How can gang violence be prevented? Detroit: Greenhaven Press. Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price. Dir. Robert Greenwald. Brave New Films, 2005. DVD. Webb, V. J., & Kats, C. M. (2014). A Study of Poice Gang Units in Six Cities. In The Modern Gang Reader (pp. 467-474). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Yakima County Gang Assessment (Rep.). (2012). Retrieved December 13, 2016, from Yakima County Board of Commissioners website: http://jvcnorthwest.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Yakima-County-Gang-Assessment-2012.pd f Zill de Granados, O. (Director), & Reyenolds, J. (Producer). (2006). Nuestra Familia, Our Family [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: Center for Investigating Reporting. Background Yakima, Wa is located in the center of the state and widely known for its large agricultural industry. Yakima is also known for its high rates of violent and property crimes, high poverty rate (the latest US census, 2010, showed that around 21%) and the large population of Chicana/o, Latina/o concentrated in the area, around 43%. The City and County have taken extensive suppressive efforts to abolish gangs in the area. These include a county wide criminal justice sales tax, gang court, a police gang task force, a gang hot line, gang prosecutors and the Yakima Gang Free Initiative. The State of Washington also had enacted “gang enhancement sentencing”. If the court finds that a defendant committed a crime in order to benefit a criminal street gang time can be added to their sentence. The city has also been working with federal crime agencies to capture and prosecute gang members in federal court and send them to prison for longer sentences. However good intentioned, most of these efforts have been proven ineffective in reducing violence in the city. Prime example, the Yakima County’s juvenile gang court which, started over 5 years ago with a $300,000 grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation will be ending this May after little success. The focus of most efforts have been suppressive and little attention is given to community development or prevention/intervention programs. Scholarly research shows that the most effective way to combat gang violence is by focusing on prevention and intervention methods, while using suppression as a last resort. The City and County of Yakima historically have followed the main stream narrative of gangs and gang members. They are bad people and should be incarcerated. This main stream narrative neglects to focus on the societal factors that often lead youth to joining gangs, and societies influence in the creation and continuation of gangs. 1. Create ground work plans for gang diversion program for Yakima County. Historically, the issue of gang violence has been addressed by incarcerating gang members quicker and for longer sentences. Government efforts include tough on crime policies which punish the individual but, ignores the racial, social and economic inequalities that perpetuate the cycle of gang violence. The gang diversion program works to address the social factors that contribute to perpetuation of gangs and works with individual gang members to give them the tools to be successful and get out of the cycle of violence. Deliverable: A business plan for non-profit gang diversion program, and short video “commercial” for organization. 2. Purpose: Give youth and students an opportunity to develop self-identity through cultural education. Research shows that youth who join gangs develop their self- identity through their gang membership. Local Yakima gang members report experiencing discrimination in schools by teachers and administrators and that school curriculum does not teach them any information relevant to their culture. The intention is to give youth and students the opportunity to learn about their history and culture in school, to keep them in school, engaged and the opportunity to develop sense of self in relation to their culture. Method and Deliverable: Working with several incarcerated individuals from Yakima to create a culturally relevant curriculum to be implemented in schools/educational programs and/or a children’s book. 3. Purpose: Compare local administrators, law enforcement agents, social workers and teachers perceptions of gang violence in Yakima to data about gang violence in Yakima. The intention is see if perceptions or gang violence match statistics of gang violence. Determine if current spending on gang suppression is cost effective. Method: Survey local employees law enforcement, government and public agencies. Complete a budget/fiscal analysis of city/county spending on gang programs, or anti- gang efforts. Deliverable: A written report on findings. Demonstrates the following KSA’s 1. Research, data and fiscal analysis 2. Working within systems of government, community organizations. 3. Creating visualizations 4. Knowledge of criminal justice, public law, organizational policies. 5. Community organizing. Deliverables: 1. Report detailing findings of survey “Gang Violence in Yakima”, fiscal analysis of funding spent on gang programs, and advocacy plan/ proposal for alternatives plans to address gang violence in Yakima. 2. Chicana/o cultural curriculum or children’s book. 3. Business plan for gang diversion program. Hopes and Outcomes: 1. Create effective programs to reduce gang suppression and violence. 2. Create more opportunities for intervention and prevention programs to be implemented in Yakima. 3. Give Yakima youth more opportunities to develop self and cultural identity. I will be working collaboratively with local government officials, Yakima community members, religious & non-profit organizations and gang members who are currently incarcerated to develop ideas. I will practice effective communication by working with people from different areas of local government, the public and incarcerated peoples. I will critically analyze current practices and spending for gang suppression programs, create new possibilities for the community and work towards positive change. I will value fairness and equity by addressing the social, racial and economic inequalities within the Yakima community that lead to gangs. I will advocate on behalf of the public for a safer and more equitable community. My proposed project will contribute to positive change by creating opportunities for those who are normally marginalized and reducing social inequity. Project TimeLine Week 10 Winter March 12-18: Craft Survey’s. Send martials to incarcerated participants. Eval Week March 19-25: Send in HSR for review. Complete need analysis for business plan. Spring Break- March 26- April 1: Complete products & services and market analysis for business plan. Visit Walla Walla for planning with incarcerated participants. Week 1 April 2- 8: Trip to Yakima to film, survey residents and visit non-profit/ community organizations. Create management team for business plan. Send survey to local administrators. Week 2 April 9-15: Start financial plan for business plan, develop name and logo. Week 3 April 16-22: Research current spending in Yakima. Find potential donors for business plan. Write grant proposals. Week 4 April 23-29: Record audio of currently incarcerated gang members for short film. Create executive summary for business plan. Week 5 April 30- May 6: Edit footage and audio. Collect and analyze survey date. Week 6 May 7-13: Visit Walla Walla for curriculum/children’s book work. Start written report. Week 7 May 14-20: Finalize business plan. Finalize video. Week 8 May 21-27: Create visualization for marketing. Work on presentation of business plan. Week 9 May 28- June 3: Visit Walla to finalize curriculum and/or children’s book. Week 10 June 4-9: Finalize presentation, and written report on survey finding and financial analysis. CITY OF YAKIMA LEGAL DEPARTMENT 200 South Third Street, 2nd Fl. | Yakima, WA 98901 P: 509.575.6030 | F: 509.575.6160 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL: COVERED BY THE ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT PRIVILEGES M E M O R A N D U M April 20, 2017 TO: Chair and Members of the Public Safety Committee Cliff Moore, City Manager FROM: Cynthia Martinez, Assistant City Attorney SUBJECT: Discussion of Response to David Morales’ Email In the beginning of April, David Morales sent the following email to the members of the Public Safety Committee: Dear members of the Public Safety Committee, I advise you all to read through this document prepared by the State AG's office and ensure that our jail exercises the best practices. "No provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act authorizes federal officials to command local or state officials to detain suspected aliens subject to removal.8 Government entities that receive detainer requests are not relieved of their obligation to comply with the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and article I, § 7 of the Washington Constitution. And, the Supreme Court of the United States has noted that “[d]detaining individuals solely to verify their immigration status would raise constitutional concerns.”9 Absent a judicial warrant, a government entity may only hold an individual in custody if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person has committed a crime." -David Morales Commission for Hispanic Affairs This is a quote from the recently published AG guide, “Concerning Immigration Enforcement.” See attached excerpt. David Morales had previously written a long letter to all Council members Page 2 in which he raised a number of issues. One issue has revealed potential liability for the City and I recommend a policy change that would protect the City. I am referring to the City Jail practice of holding individuals past their release time pursuant to Federal Administrative Warrants. Many jurisdictions, including Benton Franklin County, are now requiring judicial warrants to affect a hold. This change is supported by the AG guide mentioned above. I suggest that we work towards making this policy change. FROM: Yakima Police Activities League 602 N. 4th St Yakima, WA 98901 509-575-6180 INVOICE INVOICE #143 DATE: 03-20-17 TO: City of Yakima Attn.: Mr. Cliff Moore, City Manager 129 N. Second Street Yakima, WA 98901 FOR: GFI Contract: February, 2017 Service DESCRIPTION MONTH RATE AMOUNT Gang Free Project Contract with City of Yakima February, 2017 $9,166.66 $9,166.66 1. In collaboration with Sergeant Uriel Mendoza from the Yakima Police Department, YPAL held a Gang Awareness Seminar onsite. 2. In partnership with Safe Yakima Valley and YPD we have enrolled 7 youth from YPAL into a young Ladies & Justice League. The program is to mentor, support and encourage young ladies of the Yakima Valley who are interested in law and criminal justice careers. 3. 2 YPAL youth as well as other youth from the Yakima Valley made a trip to Olympia, WA, for Lobby Day. They were able to speak to Senator King to express their point of views on subjects such as education, health care, and criminal justice. 4. In February YPAL had 3 GRIP Outreach Requests which resulted from the direct outreach of our Youth Service Coordinator. 2 are females and 1 is a male. 5. Our YSC conducted Street Outreach interventions with 14 youth/parents. 6. 2 youth were referred to Behavioral Health Services for drug and alcohol evaluations and treatment. 5 youth are attending the drug and alcohol prevention life skills classes, which are being taught by an advocate from Behavioral Health at our facility twice a week. 7. YPAL had 15 visits for help with homework and tutoring. 8. 1 youth was re-engaged in classes to obtain his G.E.D. 9. One youth was assisted in obtaining employment and was transported to the interview. 10. YPAL offered mentoring, art, boxing, wrestling, tutoring, G.E.D. classes, Life Skills classes, alcohol prevention and counseling, and Friday Family Night to community youth and adults. We two thousand two hundred and seventy visits for programs serving youth and families in February. TOTAL $9,166.66 Make all checks payable to Yakima Police Activities League. Due upon receipt. Thank you.