Police reform isn’t only about cops. County prosecutors must be part of the WA effort

Being a peace officer is not an easy job. Over the course of my 19 years in law enforcement, it’s only gotten harder. The demands placed on our profession continue to grow dramatically and community expectations of law enforcement have changed significantly.

That’s why I and my fellow members of the Washington Fraternal Order of Police have chosen to engage with victims’ advocacy groups, community organizations, criminal justice system stakeholders and lawmakers to address needed changes in law enforcement policies and procedures. We certainly haven’t agreed with every idea that has been proposed, but we recognize that we must be open to change in order to help rebuild a trusting relationship between law enforcement and the broader community.

Change is never easy, and many dedicated law enforcement professionals are hesitant to adopt new ways of doing things after years on the job. Their hesitancy has led them to question new approaches taken by the Legislature and to raise doubts about new legislation among both officers and the public.

The Legislature is currently considering several bills that directly address questions raised by these skeptics. SHB 1735 would confirm that law enforcement officers can still provide support to community mental health officers; SHB 1719 would affirm that law enforcement use of certain non-lethal weapons like bean-bag launchers is specifically permitted by statute. And SHB 2037 and SSB 5919 clarify what physical force means and when it can be used during investigatory stops.

We support these measures because the additional clarity they bring will help keep peace officers safer and enable them to better protect their communities.

However, there is another important public misperception that must be addressed and corrected in the wake of last year’s police reform measures. There are those who claim that their implementation has resulted in increasing crime rates in various communities.

That assertion ignores two important facts. First, crime rates have been on the rise in many communities for several years, long before last year’s legislative changes took effect last July. Second, blaming recent legislative changes for rising crime rates is an over-simplification that ignores the many complex factors that drive these statistics.

The reality is that economic inequality, school drop-out rates, inadequate community mental health funding, stresses created by the COVID pandemic, and many other factors can impact crime rates.

There’s another important factor that has a major impact on the crime rate, and it’s one the Legislature can do something about. Far too often, local prosecutors are given far too much discretion in bail recommendations and in determining which cases will move forward to the courts.

There’s nothing that is more frustrating for peace officers than building a strong case against a criminal and having the local prosecutor arbitrarily decide that it’s not worth moving forward. There’s nothing more devastating for victims of crimes than seeing suspects released on their own recognizance or given a token bail number. And there’s nothing more devastating for a community than when one of those suspects then goes on to commit even more serious crimes after being released.

In contrast, there’s nothing that emboldens criminals more than the realization that they are unlikely to face a trial, a conviction, or any consequences for their actions.

That’s why we supported Substitute Senate Bill 5691, sponsored by Sen. Chris Gildon (R-Puyallup). SB 5691 required all county prosecuting attorneys that receive over 5,000 adult and juvenile criminal referrals annually to track those referrals and their filing decisions. The bill also required them to make this data and a summary available to public.

Although this measure failed to advance this session, we will continue to collaborate with lawmakers and other stakeholders to bring this important issue back for consideration next year. This added transparency would go a long way toward applying the same degree of accountability to prosecutors that is being applied to peace officers in the field. It would also give the voters the data they need to make informed decisions when local prosecutors run for re-election.

Our communities are changing. Our policing is changing. It’s time for our prosecutors to change, too.