Racial profiling by police appears to be a concern in a handful of Connecticut communities, according to a new state report, but Ridgefield isn’t on a list of police departments with traffic stop statistics that suggest profiling problems.
Ridgefield’s percentage of minority traffic stops is almost the same as the percentage of minority drivers calculated to be on the roads in town — both just under 16% — using the report’s category of “estimated driving population.”
The report shows Ridgefield’s percentage of minority traffic stops as 15.52%, while the percentage of minorities in the estimated driving population is 15.86%.
Both those figures are more than double the percentage of minority residents in Ridgefield’s over-16 driving age population — 7.29%, according to the report.
Almost 88% of minority drivers stopped in Ridgefield — 87.85%, the reports says — are not Ridgefield residents.
The report’s category of “estimated driving population,” or “EDP,” has gotten some criticism, but it is an attempt to create a more realistic statistical basis for comparison than simply the town’s resident population — or its over-16 driving age population — by factoring in things like the employers in a town, and the racial makeup of neighboring communities, to determine the population on the roads at rush hour when the traffic stop samples were taken.
Veil of darkness
Ridgefield also showed no cause for concern about racial profiling on the report’s “veil of darkness” analysis. This used specific windows of time in mornings and evenings — times of day that are dark at some parts of the year and light at other parts of the year — to see whether minority drivers had a higher chance of being stopped when their race or ethnicity was visible to officers on patrol.
It compared, for instance, the likelihood a minority driver would be stopped by police at 5:30 on a Monday evening in spring, when it’s light out, and 5:30 on a Monday evening in winter, when it’s dark at the same time.
Numbers showed that minority drivers had very similar chances of being stopped by Ridgefield police in daylight, when their race would be evident, and after dark, when a driver’s race wouldn’t be known to an officer making traffic stops.
“For Ridgefield,” said Ken Barone of Central Connecticut University, one of the report’s authors, “… there were virtually no differences found. There really were no statistical differences found between the likelihood a minority is stopped when it’s light out than the likelihood a minority is stopped when it’s dark out.”
Report’s concern
The Racial Profiling Prohibition Project Report on Traffic Stop Data Analysis and Findings, 2013-2014, as it is officially called, was released in mid-April by the Connecticut Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy at Central Connecticut State University.
It includes information on 92 municipal departments, 13 state police troops, and 13 special agencies — like campus police at colleges — that have the authority to conduct traffic stops.
The report’s authors found cause for concern about racial profiling by some police across the state.
“Although there has always been widespread public support for the equitable treatment of individuals across racial demographics, recent national headlines have brought this issue to the forefront of American consciousness and created a national debate about policing policies,” the report says.
It presents the results of an analysis of the 620,000 traffic stops statewide in Connecticut during a 12-month study period from Oct. 1, 2013, to Sept. 30, 2014. All the numbers are based on drivers’ race or ethnicity as reported by the officers making the stops.
“A total of 13.5% of motorists stopped during the analysis period were observed to be black. A comparable 11.7% of stops were motorists of Hispanic descent,” the report says of statewide data.
“The results of the Veil of Darkness analysis indicated that minority stops were more likely to have occurred during daylight hours than at night,” the report says. “The statistical disparity provides evidence in support of the claim that certain officers in the state are engaged in racial profiling during daylight hours when motorist race and ethnicity is visible.”
Five police agencies — Groton town, Granby, and Waterbury police, and State Police Troop C (Tolland) and Troop H (Hartford) — were found to have “significant” disparities in their rates of traffic stops for different racial and ethnic groups, meaning evidence suggests those departments may have problems with racial profiling, and closer study is needed.
Seven towns — including Stratford, Wethersfield, Hamden, Manchester, New Britain, Waterbury, and East Hartford — did not make the “significant disparities” list but “were found to have consistent disparities that may indicate the presence of racial and ethnic bias according to the four descriptive measures used to evaluate racial and ethnic disparities.”
Barone said last Tuesday that any town that pulled over racial minorities at a rate 10 percentage points higher than the state average was “identified as an outlier” and made the “consistent disparities” list.
Ridgefield figures
Ridgefield was not among the towns highlighted as possibly problematic in terms of racial profiling.
The evenhandedness the town showed in “minority” traffic stops — a group that includes blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and American Indians — held with town figures on drivers perceived as “black.”
Statewide, 13.5% of drivers stopped were black. There were 29 communities with higher rates of pulling over black drivers than the statewide average of 13.5% — and 11 communities exceeded the state average by more than 10%.
Black drivers made up 3.61% of Ridgefield stops, while blacks make up just 0.77% of the town’s population of over-16 driving-age residents.
As with “minority stops” in general, the percentages are closer when the benchmark used is “estimated driving population” — drivers on the roads — as opposed to the town’s over-16 population.
Blacks account for 3.16% of traffic stops and make up 3.84% of the estimated driving population, according to the report.
Some 90.60% of black drivers pulled over were not Ridgefield residents.
Hispanics are involved in 9.83% of Ridgefield’s traffic stops, and are just 3.46% of the over-16 population, the report says, and 91.72% of Hispanic drivers stopped were non-residents.
Of 2,686 traffic stops examined, 10.13% had Hispanic drivers, while Hispanics make up 8.03% of the estimated driving population.
Redding police Chief Douglas Fuchs, a former president of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association and a member of the advisory board to the study — as well as a former Ridgefield officer — has said the tests used in the report are flawed because the assumptions regarding the driving population of a town aren’t adequate to present an accurate picture.
“Knowing who police are stopping without knowing who is actually on the roads is not a useful tool for police chiefs across the state or any other individual or group seeking to gain a greater understanding of the issue,” he said.
“The census data for an individual community is not [enough], the census data plus employment data is not [enough] either.”
Still, Pamela D. Hayes, executive director of the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association (CPCA), suggested that chiefs try to make use of the information in the report.
“The CPCA and its members continue to support fair, impartial and unbiased policing not only in traffic stops, but in all aspects of providing law enforcement services throughout the state,” a release from the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association said. “In light of troubling events occurring nationwide involving the police and the communities they serve, it is clear that an ongoing dialogue is essential to re-establishing a foundation of trust and mutual respect.
“The CPCA has urged each police chief in the state to review the data presented pertaining to their community and to use the information as part of their overall efforts in providing ethical and unbiased police services by members of their respective law enforcement agencies.”
The report is the first major analysis since changes to the Alvin W. Penn Act went into effect in October 2013 to improve and strengthen 1999 legislation intended to remedy racial profiling concerns brought on by federal allegations, a press release from CCSU says.
Mike Lawlor, of the state’s Office of Policy Management, said in March that there are no “penalties” against police departments “involved in this at all. They’re not penalized or graded.”