Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Systems Failure: EVICTION FREEZES during COVID-19. U.S. HUD does not know it's role to the public and not investors during COVID-19 and Beyond.

COVID-19 is child's play in terms of what's coming.  A  'perfect storm'.

BEMA International

Search Results

Web results

Jun 20, 2020 - Renters in 42 states have been protected under eviction moratoriums, postponing rent payments as the economy stutters due to COVID-19. As ...
May 31, 2020 - About half of the states have started lifting eviction moratoriums, according to Emily Benfer, a housing expert and visiting law professor at ...
Jun 19, 2020 - As states reopen, freezes on rent and evictions are starting to expire, leaving people faced with repaying months of back rent while still dealing ...
Find out if there's an eviction ban or utility shutoff moratorium where you live. Get the ... -No utility shutoffs until state of emergency is lifted or the Dep't of Public Utility orders otherwise. ... The court has stated that it will not extend the freeze.

Monday, June 29, 2020

June 2020. From October 2014. 'Upcoming Nonprofit and NGO Wars (2015-2020). Resistance is futile

June 2020

We have reached the point of C5&P (Cooperation, Collaboration, Communication, Coordination, Community engagement, and  Partnering)  or perish from 2020 and beyond.

Business as usual is not functionable.

BEMA International

------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, October 11, 2014


The Upcoming Nonprofit and NGO Wars (2015-2020)

            The Upcoming Nonprofit and NGO Wars  (2015-2020)
The Emerging Market for Nonprofit Control:  Business Model Implications
………..”the new nonprofit business model will incorporate a holding company organizational structure to facilitate changes in corporate control, capital formation, efficiency, transaction processing, and risk mitigation.  Specifically, the holding company organization structure can be expected to yield the following benefits……..”

Within our community we have so many nonprofit organizations, some performing the same function with variations in mission & vision, and approaching the same funding pool with negative results.  Some forming at the drop of a hat, and even ordered online via the internet. 

We have to begin to combine our resources, by pass egos, promote collaborations, partnerships, and strategic thinking beyond the expected.  Two or four squeaky wheels are more effective supporting the wagon to get greased then one.

Nonprofits Have Laid Off 1.6M since March, Finds Center for Civil Society. June 2020

logo


Nonprofits Have Laid Off 1.6M since March, Finds Center for Civil Societ

June 24, 2020

For nearly 20 years, Dr. Lester Salamon of the Center for Civil Society Studies at Johns Hopkins University has been tracking the growth of the nonprofit sector. Last year’s study, for example, based on 2016 data, found that nonprofit employment had grown to tie manufacturing employment at 12.29 million. According to the 2017 figures contained in the latest report, nonprofit employment has passed manufacturing, having risen in 2017 to 12.49 million (versus 12.4 million for manufacturing). Had the report been published, as it was last year, in February, that might have been the headline.
The report finds a continuation of 2016’s trends in 2017. Nonprofit wages in 2017 totaled $670 billion. Nonprofit wages were 97 percent of private sector wages but generally exceeded private sector wages where nonprofits are prevalent. Intriguingly, nonprofits may soon be the nation’s second-largest employment sector. (The holder of that spot in 2017, accommodations and food services, has contracted severely under COVID-19.)
But of course, the report was not published in the winter—and, as the scope of the pandemic became clear, Salamon and his team decided to push the publication back, allowing the report to not just discuss 2017 data, but to look at the field in 2020—and, for the same reasons they decided to do so, that is NPQ’s focus here as well.
As Salamon and coauthor Chelsea Newhouse write:
As the pandemic reached the United States, it became clear that efforts to slow its spread would have profound impacts on all aspects of our lives, and not least of all on the nonprofit sector. But as is too often the case, these effects seemed especially likely to be ignored in the rush of attention to the other sectors impacted by the pandemic. This not only made this year’s report especially important in order to establish the most recent baseline of information possible against which to chart the virus’s impact, but also, it induced us to go beyond our normal practice of reporting only on past developments by seeking information that would allow us to make meaningful estimates of the impact of current developments, and current policy responses, on this crucial sector in something approaching real time.
It seems clear that Salamon and Newhouse made the right call, even though it required working with lower quality data. As they write, “We were reduced to estimating the nonprofit job losses during the critical first three months of the active impact of the coronavirus—March, April, and May 2020. To do so, we took the conservative approach of assuming that nonprofit job losses were roughly proportional to the share of nonprofit jobs in the various fields in which nonprofits were active as of the latest date for which such data are available, i.e., 2017.”
Salamon and Newhouse also decided to assume that, due to widely reported problems with May unemployment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (with millions misclassified as employed), that for their study, only half of the job additions that had been reported in May would actually be counted as job restorations.
The results of the analysis, however, are stunning.
Bottom line: more than one in eight people employed by a nonprofit in February (13 percent) was not employed as of the end of May. In sum, 1.64 million nonprofit workers lost their jobs in three months.
All told, an estimated 8.8 percent of all jobs that have been lost economy-wide have been lost in the nonprofit sector Because nonprofit employment constitutes 10.2 percent of private sector jobs, this ironically means that nonprofit employment as a percentage of private sector employment has gone up. But the effect is nonetheless devastating. Salamon and Newhouse detail some of the lowlights:

Nonprofit Job Loss, March through May 2020, by Sector
  • Professional, scientific and technical: 14,689
  • Education: 323,201
  • Health care: 574,530
  • Childcare: 97,568
  • Social assistance (not including childcare): 161,439
  • Arts: 205,964
  • Other services (civic, advocacy, religious, etc.): 218,167
  • Miscellaneous other: 47,570
  • Total: 1,643,128



Additionally, Salamon and Newhouse note that while 8.8 percent of all private sector job losses were of nonprofit workers, in the fields in which nonprofits are active, the losses of nonprofit jobs were, not surprisingly, a far larger percentage. Nonprofit job losses include 71 percent of private sector educational workers, rising to 84 percent for those working in elementary and secondary schools; 43 percent of private sector healthcare worker job loss, including 35 percent of nursing care workers, 45 percent of outpatient care workers, and 84 percent of hospital workers; 35 percent of private sector job losses in social assistance, including 91 percent of those in community food and housing services and 86 percent of those in vocational rehabilitation services; 57 percent of job losses in private sector performing arts companies and 87 percent of those in private sector museums and similar facilities; and 60 percent of job losses in private sector religious, civic, and professional organizations.
Salamon and Newhouse also examine the impact of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) on the nonprofit sector, which provides a window into the shape of the nonprofit sector as a whole. As readers may recall, any nonprofit with 500 employees or less was eligible for PPP:
Category
Number
Percent
Nonprofits with less than 500 workers
162,167
97.7%
Employees in nonprofits with less than 500 workers
4,782,982
38.3%
Wages in nonprofit firms with less than 500 workers
$190,656,919
28.4%

If the maximum amount of PPP forgivable loans is a little under one-fifth of the annual wage bill (10 weeks’ wages), this suggests these nonprofits were eligible for approximately $35 billion in federal support through PPP, or about five percent of total program funds.
These numbers are estimates and future data will be required to confirm these numbers. The great unknown question, note Salamon and Newhouse, is “to see whether nonprofits’ historical resiliency holds up under this unique economic pressure—as it did during the more traditional recessionary period following the 2008 economic downturn.”
In the conclusion to their report, Salamon and Newhouse restate a common theme of their work—namely, that the US nonprofit sector is “a far more sizable and robust economic force in the American economy than is widely recognized. In addition to its crucial programmatic contributions to the country’s health, education, social service, and cultural activities, nonprofits constitute the country’s third largest workforce and generate its third largest payroll of any national industry, and hence make important contributions to the tax revenue of the country’s national, state, and local governments.”
They underscore, however, the devastating impacts of the pandemic. The crisis, they note, has not only resulted in the loss of more than 1.6 million nonprofit jobs, but it has put “significant pressure on the crucial services that these organizations have historically provided.”

Unity Rally Against Racism. Thurs, July 2, 2020. 7-9pm ET.


Unity Rally Against Racism

Unity Rally Against Racism

Thursday, July 2nd
6 PM - 8 PM CDT

RSVP Here

For more information please visit unityrally.us
# # #

About LULAC
The League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is the nation’s largest and oldest civil rights volunteer-based organization that empowers Hispanic Americans and builds strong Latino communities. Headquartered in Washington, DC, with 1,000 councils around the United States and Puerto Rico, LULAC’s programs, services and advocacy address the most important issues for Latinos, meeting critical needs of today and the future. For more information, visit www.LULAC.org.

Hidden Faces of FGM in Marginalized Populations by African Coalition. Healing Wounds, Moving Forward. June 30, 2020


Greetings, 

Please join us for the Zoom meeting: "Unveiling the Forgotten Faces of FGM", scheduled tomorrow, June 30th at 11:00am-12:30pm PST. 


Access Information:

Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 930 3459 2572
Password: 640581
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,93034592572#,,,,0#,,640581# US (San Jose)
+12532158782,,93034592572#,,,,0#,,640581# US (Tacoma)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
        +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
        +1 929 205 6099 US (New York)
        +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
        +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
Meeting ID: 930 3459 2572
Password: 640581
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adqLwdoRW8

Systems Failure: Law Enforcement. Following the Money. From February 2017.

June 2020

-------------------
Could addressing performance appraisal with community input, and departmental funding review and allocation play a role in changing the paradigm?

Stray away from others narrative of diversity & Inclusion.  Could 'inclusive equity' in community be another possible solution to the systems failure of law enforcement in communities in addition to performance appraisal of community input?


CDS  Chairman\CEO BEMA International


February 2017

-------------

Community Engagement. Law Enforcement Funding Program. Body-Warn Camera.


$$  Follow the money.  Greater impacts by our communities nationwide should involve restrictions, disapproval, refusal of funding for law enforcement programs that do not benefit or enhance community engagement.  DOJ Body-Worn Camera policies and funding are just one program.  Investigate, use FOI act to review program funding of DOJ, DHS, and FEMA to local law enforcement agencies.

CDS.  CEO BEMA.


Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program
FY 2017 Competitive Grant Announcement
Applications Due: February 16, 2017

Overview
Law enforcement agencies across the country and worldwide are using body-worn cameras (BWC) as a promising tool to improve law enforcement interactions with the public. BWCs can provide a visual and audio record of interactions. Some preliminary evidence indicates that the presence of BWCs helps strengthen accountability and transparency, and can assist in de- escalating conflicts, resulting in more constructive encounters between the police and members of the community. This competitive solicitation is for law enforcement agencies seeking to establish or enhance BWC Policy and Implementation Programs (PIP). Successful applicants will be responsible for a mandatory 50 percent in-kind or cash match.

The FY 2017 BWC PIP will support the implementation of body-worn camera programs in law enforcement agencies across the country. The intent of the program is to help agencies develop, implement, and evaluate a BWC program as one tool in a law enforcement agency’s comprehensive problem-solving approach to enhance officer interactions with the public and build community trust.

Successful applicants will develop and implement policies and practices required for effective program adoption, and will address program factors including the purchase, deployment, and maintenance of camera systems and equipment; data storage and access; and privacy considerations. BJA expects the BWC programs to make a positive impact on the quality of policing in these jurisdictions and to inform national efforts to improve the use of BWCs more broadly. While BWC equipment may be purchased under this program, successful applicants must demonstrate a commitment and adherence to a strong BWC policy framework, including comprehensive policy adoption and requisite training.

Eligibility
Eligible applicants are limited to public agencies of state government, units of local government, and federally recognized Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior); or any department, agency, or instrumentality of the foregoing that performs criminal justice functions (including combinations of the preceding, one of which is designated as the primary applicant).

BJA welcomes applications under which two or more entities would carry out the federal award; however, only one entity may be the applicant. Any others must be proposed as subrecipients (“subgrantees").  The applicant must be the entity that would have primary responsibility for carrying out the award, including administering the funding and managing the entire Body-Worn Camera Policy and Implementation Program. Under this solicitation, only one application by any particular applicant entity will be considered. An entity may, however, be proposed as a subrecipient (“subgrantee”) in more than one application.

BJA may elect to fund applications submitted under this FY 2017 solicitation in future fiscal years, dependent on, among other considerations, the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations.

If clarification as to an entity’s eligibility is needed, applicants are encouraged to contact BJA to confirm their eligibility before developing a full application. BJA will consider supporting documentation relevant to a determination of eligibility.

Deadline
Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due to be submitted and in receipt of a successful validation message in Grants.gov by 11:59p.m. eastern time on February 16, 2017.


Technology Innovation for Public Safety (TIPS)
Addressing Precipitous Increases in Crime
FY 2017 Competitive Grant Announcement
Applications Due: February 7, 2017

Overview
While many jurisdictions are making significant progress implementing justice information sharing solutions to address critical gaps in coordinating crime prevention across organizations and jurisdictions, there remains significant challenges inhibiting the ability of the criminal justice system to respond to threats to public safety, especially when it comes to addressing significant increases in crime(s). For this solicitation, justice information-sharing technology refers to any technology (hardware and/or software, hosted residentially or remotely) that plays a role in the collection, storage, sharing, and analysis of criminal justice data. Funding under this program is
provided to assist state, local, territorial, and tribal jurisdictions in enhancing their justice information-sharing capacity through the use of innovative technological solutions in order to allow them to more effectively address disproportional and precipitous increases in crime(s).
This is not an equipment purchasing solicitation. Applications limited to equipment purchases will be ineligible and eliminated from funding consideration.

Eligibility
Under this solicitation BJA is looking for innovative technology implementation and applicant projects that specifically address precipitous increases in crime(s) on a local, county, or regional basis. Eligible applicants are public agencies of state governments, units
of local government, federally recognized Indian tribal governments that perform law enforcement functions (as determined by the Secretary of the Interior), or government agencies acting as fiscal agents for one of the previously listed eligible applicants.

BJA welcomes applications under which two or more entities would carry out the federal award; however, only one entity may be the applicant. Any others must be proposed subrecipients (“subgrantees"). The applicant must be the entity that would have primary
responsibility for carrying out the award, including administering the funding and managing the entire project. A subrecipient can represent nonprofit or for-profit organizations (including tribal nonprofit or for-profit organizations), faith-based and community organizations, or
institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education) that support initiatives to improve the functioning of the criminal justice system as well as the same type of agency as the primary applicant. It is important to note that for-profit organizations (as well as other recipients) must agree to forgo any profit or management fee and this must be stated in the application. Applications establishing these types of partnerships will receive priority consideration.

The application should also clearly identify the lead applicant and the subrecipient(s). The lead applicant must be the entity with primary responsibility for administering the funding and managing the entire project. Under this solicitation, only one application by any particular
applicant entity will be considered. An entity may, however, be proposed as a subrecipient (“subgrantee”) in more than one application.

To be eligible for funding under this solicitation applicants must propose solutions that will be deployed to jurisdictions that are currently experiencing precipitous or extraordinary increases in crime, in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 3756(b)(1) to assist them in addressing these increases. To assist with the application process and verify the applicant’s eligibility, a required maximum two-page document is required to be submitted with the application specifically identifying the increased crime(s) to be addressed and showing statistical data proving the increases over a two-year period.

BJA may elect to fund applications submitted under this FY 2017 solicitation in future fiscal years, dependent on, among other considerations, the merit of the applications and on the availability of appropriations.

Deadline
Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on February 7, 2017.

Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Program
FY 2017 Competitive Grant Announcement
Applications Due: February 2, 2017

Overview
Healthy, vibrant communities are places that provide the opportunities, resources, and environment that children and adults need to maximize their life outcomes, including high-quality schools and cradle-to-career educational programs; high-quality and affordable housing; thriving commercial establishments; access to quality health care and health services; art and cultural amenities; parks and other recreational spaces; and the safety to take advantage of these opportunities. Unfortunately, millions of Americans live in distressed communities where a combination of crime, poverty, unemployment, poor health, struggling schools, inadequate housing, and disinvestment keeps many residents from reaching their full potential. Further, research suggests that crime clustered in small areas, or crime “hot spots,” accounts for a disproportionate amount of crime and disorder in many communities. Research also reinforces that in some communities there are also a significant percentage of residents who are under criminal supervision or returning from correctional facilities, creating opportunities for community-based, proactive approaches for these residents that can prevent recidivism. The complexity of these issues has led to the emergence of comprehensive place-based and community-oriented initiatives that involve criminal justice and service providers from multiple sectors, as well as community representatives from all types of organizations, working together
to reduce and prevent crime and to revitalize communities. This kind of longer term, community driven approach is critical in communities where historic lack of resources and assistance can erode the confidence of residents in the ability of governments to solve these community challenges.

In many ways, community safety and crime prevention are prerequisites to the transformation of distressed communities, including the revitalization of civic engagement. Addressing community safety is the role of criminal justice agencies, the community, and its partners as a whole. To improve and revitalize communities, all relevant stakeholders should be included: law enforcement and criminal justice (such as prosecutors, defense, pretrial, corrections and reentry agencies), education, housing, city attorneys, health and human services, community and faith based nonprofits, local volunteers, residents, and businesses. Policymakers and their advisors are also critical partners in supporting these efforts to enhance relationships with residents to more effectively address local crime issues.

Eligibility
Eligible applicants are limited to states, institutions of higher education (including tribal institutions of higher education), units of local government, nonprofit organizations (including tribal nonprofit organizations), and federally recognized Indian tribal governments (as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior) as fiscal agent.

Category 1: Implementation Grant (NOTE: eligibility limited to previous BCJI Planning grantees)

Category 2: Planning and Implementation Grant (open to any eligible applicant)

For this solicitation, community is defined broadly as a geographic area that has social meaning to residents. In urban areas, the term community may be used interchangeably with neighborhood to describe a specific geographic area that is delineated by major streets or
physical topography. In urban areas, a community is typically less than two miles wide, while in rural and tribal areas it is often larger and part of an entire county.

The BCJI application requires a consortium of criminal justice, community, and/or human service partners (hereinafter referred to as “cross-sector partnership”) to plan and implement a targeted strategy addressing crime in a specific community. The cross-sector partnership must designate one eligible entity to serve as the fiscal agent. The fiscal agent must ensure that the cross-sector partnership is committed to and can successfully oversee key enforcement, prevention, intervention, and community engagement strategies and access and analyze key data (crime and other) with regular input from the research and law enforcement agency partners.

Jurisdictions are strongly encouraged to coordinate with and seek the support of their local U.S. Attorney and local policymakers and to connect with their other violent crime and community revitalization efforts.

Deadline
Applicants must register with Grants.gov prior to submitting an application. All applications are due by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on February 2, 2017

WHIHBCU Staff 

Myth No. 5 The police can effectively help with mental health crises.

Could addressing performance appraisal with community input, and departmental funding review and allocation play a role in changing the paradigm?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-policing/2020/06/25/65a92bde-b004-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html
“Unless you can make people perfect and have no mental health issues, I think it’s inevitable police officers are going to be on the front line,” a Connecticut Police Academy trainer recently told the Connecticut Mirror. In New York City, the number of 911 calls reporting “emotionally disturbed persons” almost doubled over the past decade, to nearly 180,000 a year. Across the United States, up to 10 percent of all police interactions with the public involve people with serious mental illnesses, according to a study in the journal Psychiatric Services. Cities have poured millions of dollars into the Memphis Model, which directs specially trained officers on “crisis intervention teams” to respond to such situations. This month, New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo (D) signed legislation requiring, among other things, that police provide for the “mental health needs of those under arrest or in custody.”

Police are ill-equipped to play this role. Between 25 and 50 percent of all people killed by police in the United States are having a mental health crisis, according to the Treatment Advocacy Center. And research on the effectiveness of specialized training for these calls is not encouraging. A 2014 Criminal Justice Policy Review meta-analysis showed no improvement in safety for officers or the public from the use of crisis intervention teams. A 2019 study by researchers at the University of California at San Francisco and San Quentin State Prison found that evidence to support the training was contradictory and that, in most cases, deploying the teams didn’t affect arrest and use-of-force rates. The only time we see improvements in the outcomes of these calls is when such teams are combined with increases in community-based mental health services.
Alex S. Vitale is professor of Sociology and Coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College and the author of “The End of Policing.”

Myth No. 4 Community policing empowers communities.

Could addressing performance appraisal with community input, and departmental funding review and allocation play a role in changing the paradigm?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-policing/2020/06/25/65a92bde-b004-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html
Advocates of this approach argue that the community should bring concerns to the police, developing joint strategies for resolving those problems, which gives cities and neighborhoods more control over crime-fighting. According to one of the movement’s founders, Robert Trojanowicz, this arrangement “empowers average citizens.”

Research shows that police give up little power in this process. University of Washington professor Steve Herbert, evaluating community policing in Seattle, found that the police were actively involved in deciding who constituted the “community,” systematically excluding voices critical of law enforcement. Similarly, a 2019 study in Los Angeles showed how officers made their own decisions about who was a legitimate community actor: For example, in zoning discussions they lent support to corporate chain stores over mom-and-pop businesses, in an effort to create a more easily policed environment. (The former are more likely to have their own security forces and surveillance cameras.)
Alex S. Vitale is professor of Sociology and Coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College and the author of “The End of Policing.”

Myth No. 3 Implicit-bias training can root out racism in policing.

Could addressing performance appraisal with community input, and departmental funding review and allocation play a role in changing the paradigm?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-policing/2020/06/25/65a92bde-b004-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html

This was one of the central planks of the Obama administration’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing: Racial disparities could be addressed by trainings designed to root out unconscious and unintentional bias. The Justice Department and private foundations have disbursed millions of dollars to local police departments to give this training to their officers. This month, Texas announced that it would require every police officer to receive implicit-bias training.
This training assumes that the problems of race in American policing stem from discretionary decisions by individual officers, driven by unconscious prejudice. But law professor Jonathan Kahn has shown that the research basis for this training is flawed. While implicit bias appears when you group large numbers of people together, it doesn’t show up consistently at the individual level, which is how police officers usually interact with the public. More important, advocates of such training have not proved a connection between the scoring on bias tests and actions in the world. They also lack evidence to support the effectiveness of the training to influence officer behavior.
Such training also fails to address American policing’s explicit racism problem. Officers have been associated with white-supremacist organizations, have made racially offensive postings on social media and have exchanged racist texts and emails; they are also represented by union officials who often defend officers’ racist conduct.
Alex S. Vitale is professor of Sociology and Coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College and the author of “The End of Policing.”

Myth No. 2 A diverse police force leads to better policing.

Could addressing performance appraisal with community input, and departmental funding review and allocation play a role in changing the paradigm?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-policing/2020/06/25/65a92bde-b004-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html


After the 2014 killing of Michael Brown, observers commonly noted that the Ferguson police department was substantially whiter than the population it policed. Both the Justice Department’s 2015 report and local activists called on the city to recruit more officers of color. Similar proposals have surfaced in recent weeks: Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has emphasized hiring “more black and brown officers” and “making sure that the police department actually reflects the community at large.”
Yet numerous studies show that the race of officers has no effect on the quality of policing. Having more diverse police forces does not reduce racial disparities in police killingscitizen complaintsvehicle stops or arrests to maintain order. A 2017 Indiana University study did find some modest improvements related to diversity, but only in a very small number of big-city departments; the rest of the departments in the study showed worse outcomes as diversity increased. While some recent research shows minor advantages to having more diverse police departments, the overall trend remains negative, in part because institutional pressures on black officers require that they not show any deference to black citizens. “It’s a blue thing,” writes Michigan State University criminal justice professor Jennifer Cobbina.


Alex S. Vitale is professor of Sociology and Coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College and the author of “The End of Policing.”

RECOMMENDED READING LIST

Search This Blog

ARCHIVE List 2011 - Present