>>> WELCOME TO "AT ISSUE."

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US. "

H. WINN WILSON.

IN THE LAST SESSION SEVERAL LARGE BILLS WERE PASSED IN SPRINGFIELD.

ONE OF THOSE BILLS WAS 3653.

IT WAS A CRIMINAL JUST REFORM BILL.

IT IS HUGE IN NATURE.

IT TOUCHES ON A LOT OF DIFFERENT TOPICS.

AND TO HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IS IN THAT BILL AND HOW IT MIGHT AFFECT POLICE OFFICERS IF THE GOVERNOR SIGNS IT, WE HAVE WITH US THREE LEADERS IN THE POLICE COMMUNITY.

AND LET ME FIRST INTRODUCE TO YOU MATT SMITH.

HE IS THE WOODFORD COUNTY SHERIFF.

ALSO WITH US IS SHAWN CURRY WITH THE TRAINING RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND IS ALSO AN ACTIVE SERGEANT ON A POLICE FORCE.

AND ALSO JOINING US FROM SPRINGFIELD WE HAVE SEAN SMOOTH WITH THE POLICE BENEVOLENT PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION, WHERE HE IS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.

>> LET ME START WITH BODY CAMERAS.

WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT BODY CAMERAS.

EVEN PRIOR TO THIS BILL.

SOME POLICE DEPARTMENTS ARE MOVING FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTING BODY CAMERAS.

BUT LET ME TURN TO SHAWN CURRY FIRST.

CAN YOU GIVE US A REAL BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE?

KNOWING THAT SMALLER COMMUNITIES IMPLEMENT THIS A LITTLE BIT LATER THAN LARGER COMMUNITIES.

>> THE REQUIREMENT IS GOING TO BE THAT POLICE OFFICERS AROUND THE STATE ARE GOING TO BE MANDATED TO HAVE BODY CAMERAS, TO WEAR BODY CAMERAS WHEN THEY ARE ACTIVELY WORKING.

DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF YOUR AGENCY, THE BILL KIND OF TIERS OUT WHEN THOSE BODY CAMERAS HAVE TO BE IMPLEMENTED.

PART OF THE LEGISLATION ALSO STATES THAT THE BODY CAMERA, WHEN ACTIVATED, PER STATE LAW OR BY DEPARTMENT POLICY, IF THE OFFICER VIOLATE THAT THAT IT COULD RELATE IN A CLASS C FELONY.

>> BODY CAMERAS SOUND LIKE A GOOD IDEA IN GENERAL.

YOU GET TO TAPE WHAT'S HAPPENING.

ARE THERE SOME LIMITATIONS TO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BODY CAMERAS?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THEY'RE BEING USED FOR.

WHEN BODY CAMERAS WERE FIRST DEVELOPED AS A TOOL FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT, THEY WERE PRIMARILY TO BE USED AS A WAY, FOREVER OFFICERS TO CAPTURE EVIDENCE OF A CRIME OR AFTER A CRIME HAD OCCURRED.

AND SO THEY REALLY KIND OF MORPHED INTO, IN ADDITION TO THOSE TASKS, ALSO BEING USED AS AN AUCTION TOOL FOR OFFICERS.

-- ACCOUNTABILITY TOOL.

BY AND LARGE, THEY ARE VERY EFFECTIVE IN A NUMBER OF WAYS.

BUT CERTAINLY THE RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT IN TERMS OF ACCOUNTABILITY, WHERE OFFICERS UTILIZE BODY WORN CAMERAS AND A COMPLAINT IS MADE AGAINST THE OFFICER, IN OVER 90% OF THE CASESES THE VIDEO SHOWS THE OFFICER ACTED WITHIN POLICY.

THERE ARE VERY EFFECTIVE IN ACTUALLY CAPTURING WHAT OCCURS.

THERE'S SOME TROUBLING ASPECTS TO BODY WORN CAMERAS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THIS LAW, HOWEVER, BECAUSE ONE OF THE PROVISIONS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS AN OFFICER FROM REVIEWING THEIR CAMERA FOOTAGE PRIOR TO WRITING A REPORT.

AND THAT IN MY VIEW, AND IN THE VIEW OF A LOT OF PROSECUTORS REALLY SETS OFFICERS UP FOR FAILURE.

IF AN OFFICER, WE WOULDN'T THINK OF AS A PROSECUTOR AND I USED TO WORK IN A STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS ASSISTING IN PROSECUTIONS, WE WOULDN'T THINK OF PUTTING AN OFFICER ON THE STAND OR ASKING AN OFFICER TO WRITE A POLICE REPORT WHO HAD ARRESTED SOMEBODY FOR DUI WITHOUT FIRST REVIEWING THEIR DASH CAMERA OR THEIR BODY CAMERA OF THE INCIDENT ITSELF.

>> I'M SORRY, SEAN, FOR INTERRUPTING.

BUT I WANT TO TURN TO SHAWN CURRY AND ASK, SO DO I UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY?

YOU WRITE THE REPORT WITHOUT SEEING YOUR BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE?

>> ACCORDING TO THE LAW.

NOW, AS IT SITS NOW, THE OFFICERS THAT WORK FOR ME AND THAT I WORK WITH, IF THEY GO AND THEY HAVE BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE THEY GO TO WRITE THEIR REPORT, THEY CAN ACCESS THAT FOOTAGE AND REVIEW THAT FOOTAGE AND WRITE THE REPORT.

WITH THIS BILL AND NOT ALLOWING THEM TO DO THAT, IT'S VERY DANGEROUS.

I THINK IT'S UNFAIR FOR THE OFFICER.

BECAUSE I HAVE ENTERED INTO SO MANY CHAOTIC SCENES WHERE THERE ARE SHOOTINGS BIG FIGHTS AT NIGHTCLUBS.

YOU ARE SENDING THE OFFICERS INTO CHAOTIC SITUATIONS WHERE THINGS MOVE VERY QUICKLY VERY FAST.

AND THEN BY THE TIME THE SITUATION GETS HANDLED, CALMED LATER HAD THEY GO TO WRITE THEIR REPORT, THEY CAN'T REMEMBER EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF WHAT JUST WENT DOWN.

IF THEY WRITE A REPORT, ACCORDING TO THIS BILL, AND IF IT'S VIEWED A THEY OMITTED SOMETHING AND LEFT SOMETHING OUT THAT COULD BE A CLASS C FELONY AND SOME OF THESE SCENES, WHETHER IT'S A SHOOTING SCENE, SOME SORT OF VIOLENT CRIME THERE'S A LOT OF CHAOS.

PEOPLE SCREAMING, PEOPLE RUNNING AROUND.

TEAM FIGHTING.

IT'S HARD TO KNOW EVERY SINGLE THING YOU DID.

YOU ARE GOING TO REMEMBER THE HIGHLIGHTS, THE BIG POINTS, RIGHT?

BUT YOU ARE NOT GOING TO REMEMBER EVERY SINGLE DETAIL OF THAT SITUATION.

WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO REVIEW THAT.

>> LET ME TURN TO THE SHERIFF OF WOODFORD COUNTY.

MATT, THIS IS TAN 10 SHALL IN NATURE.

BUT BODY CAMERAS HAVE AN EXPENSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM.

>> OH, ABSOLUTELY.

>> THERE ARE OTHER ISSUES.

TRAINING ISSUES, ET CETERA, THAT THERE ARE COSTED ASSOCIATED WITH THIS.

>> CORRECT.

>> YOU ARE SEEING SMALL COMMUNITIES IN WOODFORD COUNTY WHO ARE LITERALLY ELIMINATING THEIR POLICE DEPARTMENT AND TURNING TO YOU.

>> THEY ARE CLOSING THEIR DOORS BECAUSE INTERNAL ISSUES AND THEN THE UNKNOWN COSTS, THE UNFUNDED MANDATES FROM THE STATE THAT ARE COMING OUT AS PART OF THIS BILL THAT THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO ANYMORE.

THEY ARE LITERALLY CONTACTING US, WORKING ON A CONTRACT, AND SHUTTING THEIR POLICE DEPARTMENT COMPLETELY DOWN.

>> WASHBURN BEING THE MOST RECENT.

>> CORRECT.

>> SO DO YOU HIRE ADDITIONAL DEPUTIES?

>> YES.

WE HAVE TO PUT ON ADDITIONAL STAFF.

IT'S COVERED IN THE CONTRACT WE HAVE WITH THEM.

AND THE REASON WE CAN DO IT A LITTLE CHEAPER IS BECAUSE WE KIND OF HAVE A LOT OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE ALREADY IN PLACE.

SO WHAT MAY COST THEM MORE TO DO TRAINING, WE MAY ALREADY HAVE IN PLACE.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN ACTUALLY DO IT FOR THEM IN MOST CASES CHEAPER THAN THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO IT THEMSELVES.

NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT COMES WITH A LITTLE LEARING CURVE BECAUSE EVERYBODY WANTS THEIR HOMETOWN POLICE DEPARTMENT AND NOW THEY DON'T HAVE THAT ANYWHERE.

THEY HAVE THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

AND THEY HAD TO DEAL WITH THAT IN ONE TOWN WHEN WE TOOK THEM OVER A YEAR OR SO, A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO.

WE MET WITH THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THEY WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION, THE COUNTY WAS COMING FROM EUREKA, AND, NO, YOU HAVE POLICE OFFICERS IN TOWN ALL THE TIME.

YOU HAVE DEPUTIES IN TOWN ALL THE TIME.

BUT IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A LEARNING CURVE.

BUT EVERYBODY WANTS THEIR HOMETOWN POLICE.

BUT IN MANY CASES REALLY SMALLER DEPARTMENTS, IT'S JUST NOT GOING TO BE AFFORDABLE ANYMORE.

>> GOING BACK TO THE HOUSE BILL 3653, THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT ELIMINATION OF MONETARY BAIL.

SHAWN CURRY -- I GOT TO MAKE SURE -- CAN YOU, ARE YOU CONCERNED BECAUSE MONETARY BAIL WON'T BE REQUIRED IN MOST CASES?

THE JUDGE STILL HAS DISCRETION BUT AR YOU CONCERNED THAT THERE MIGHT BE THE RELEASE OF SOMEBODY OUT ON THE STREETS WHO SHOULDN'T BE OUT ON THE STREETS?

>> YOU KNOW, WITH THE MONETARY BAIL, I'VE LOOKED AT SYSTEMS LIKE OUT IN NEW JERSEY.

THEY HAVE IT TO WHERE A JUDGE NEIGHBORS THE DETERMINATION.

FOR ME, IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE SYSTEM IS SET UP.

AND WHERE THEY CAN SET IT UP CORRECTLY.

IF WE ARREST SOMEBODY ON A FELONY CHARGE AND THE JUDGE DEEMS THEM, YOU KNOW, A VIOLENT OR POTENTIAL THREAT AND KEEPS THEM IN JAIL, THAT'S FINE.

BUT I CERTAINLY THINK THERE COULD BE ISSUES WITH THAT.

I MEAN, WHERE WE ARE DEALING WITH HUMAN ASPECT, THAT'S UNPREDICTABLE.

IF THERE IS A CASH BILL TIED TO IT MAYBE THAT INDIVIDUAL WOULD STAY LOCKED UP FOR MAYBE A LONGER PERIOD OF OF TIME TO WHERE WHOEVER THE VICTIM WAS IN THAT CRIME COULD SEEK OUT SOME SORT OF ORDER OF PROTECTION SORRY CIVIL OR THE TO -- ORDER TO STAY AWAY.

THOSE CONCERNS ARE DEFINITELY OUT THERE.

>> THERE'S ANOTHER PROVISION IN THE BILL.

SEAN SMOOT, THAT CALLS FOR AN OFFICER WHO IS, SEES ANOTHER OFFICER DOING SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED INAPPROPRIATE, TO INTERVENE AND SAY, DON'T DO THAT.

I AM NOT USING THE TECHNICAL TERMS PROPERLY BUT IS THERE A CONCERN THERE THAT THE OTHER OFFICER, WHEN DOES THAT OFFICER STEP IN AND TELL THE FIRST OFFICER, DON'T DO THAT?

>> WELL, THERE'S A COUPLE OF ISSUES THERE.

WHAT YOU ARE TOUCH, ON IS REALLY THE ABSENCE OF TRAINING ON INTERVENTION.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IN TERMS OF OFFICERS BEING REQUIRED TO INTERVENE OR REPORT THE THE STATUTE REALLY ISN'T DOING ANYTHING OTHER THAN CODIFYING WHAT IS ALREADY THE PREDOMINANT PRACTICE IN POLICING ACROSS THE STATE.

POLICE POLICE DEPARTMENTS HAVE POLICIES IN PLACErd OFFICERS TO INTERVENE IN THOSE SITUATIONS.

THE REAL PROBLEM IS, IS THE ONE THAT YOUR QUESTION KINDS OF GETS TO THE HEART OF.

WHICH IS, HOW DO WE TRAIN OFFICERS HOW TO DO THAT IN A WAY THAT DOESN'T PUT THEM IN DANGER OR THE OTHER OFFICER WHO IS PERHAPS TRYING TO TAKE SOMEONE INTO CUSTODY IN DANGER?

AND ASSURE THAT IT'S DONE IN A SAFE AND EFFECTIVE WAY.

AND SO THE REQUIREMENT REALLY WILL PUT AN ADDITIONAL MANDATE ON TO THE POLICE TRAINING BOARD TO COME UP WITH THAT CURRICULUM AND TRAINING AND SEE TO IT THAT EVERY POLICE OFFICER IN THE STATE RECEIVES IT VERY QUICKLY.

>> AND TRAINING, OF COURSE, HAS A COST ASSOCIATED WITH IT.

MATT, YOU HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT COST.

IS THERE SOMETHING IN THE BILL THAT SAYS THAT THE STATE'S GOING TO FUND THE ADDITIONAL TRAINING?

>> I NEVER SAW ANYTHING IN THERE WITH ANYTHING WAS GOING TO BE FUNDED.

IT WAS ALL PRETTY MUCH UNFUNDED MANDATES ARE GOING TO FALL LOCALLY.

>> THERE'S ALSO A PROVISION IN THE BILL THAT TALKS ABOUT OFFICERS BEING SUBJECTED TO THE POSSIBILITY OF CLASS 3 FELONIES, SEAN.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME?

UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MIGHT AN OFFICER BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY?

>> WELL, IN THE BILL, ONE OF THE ASPECTS COMES TO, IF IT'S DEEMED THAT SOMEBODY INTENTIONALLY OMIT ORDER LEFT SOMETHING OUT OF A REPORT, OR IF IT'S VIEWED AS SOMEBODY FALSIFIED SOMETHING IN A POLICE REPORT, THAT COULD BE SUBJECT TO A CLASS 3 FELONY.

SAME WITH THE USE OF THE BODY CAMERAS.

IF THE BODY CAMERAS AREN'T BEING USED PER DEPARTMENT POLICY OR THE STATE LAW AND THE EFFECTIVE MANNER IN WHICH OF THE INTENT IT CAN BE RESULT IN A CLASS 3 FELONY.

THE CONCERN WITH THAT, AGAIN, IT GOES BACK TO THAT ORIGINAL QUESTION THAT SOME OF THESE SCENES THAT I'VE BEEN ON, AND BEEN ON WITH SOME OF THESE OFFICERS, ARE SO INTENSE, THEY'RE SO CHAOTIC.

IF THEY DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO REVIEW EVERY SINGLE ASPECT OF THAT BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, THEY'RE AUTOMATICALLY KIND OF PUT IN A TRICK BAG.

WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH SEVERAL HUNDRED PEOPLE AT A SHOOTING SCENE OUTSIDE OF A NIGHTCLUB AND THERE'S FOUR OFFICERS THERE AND TRYING TO MAINTAIN CONTROL THEY CAN'T REMEMBER EVERY SINGLE THING, EVERY STEP THAT THEY TOOK.

THE OTHER ASPECT, TOO, AND I HAVE SEEN THIS QUITE A BIT WITH SOME OF THE OFFICERS, AND EVEN MYSELF, SOME OF THESE OFFICERS WILL BE WORKING SIX, SEVEN, HOURS IN A SHIFT AND SHOW UP AT A SCENE WHERE THE BODY CAMERA DIES.

THE BODY CAMERA DIES, RIGHT?

AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU ARE STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF A SITUATION YOU CAN'T BACK OUT AND GET A REPLACEMENT.

AND THE CONCERN AT THE GROUND LEVEL WITH THE OFFICERS IS, HOW'S THAT GOING TO BE VIEWED?

HOW IS THAT GOING TO BE DEEMED?

IF I AM SUBJECT TO A CLASS 3 FELONY, THAT'S A CONCERN FOR THEM.

AND THE OTHER ISSUE, I DO AGREE WITH SHAWN THAT BODY CAMERAS HELP OFFICERS AND COMPLAINTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT IT'S LIKE DNA, RIGHT?

WHEN DNA SCIENCE FIRST CAME OUT EVERYBODY THOUGHT THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE END ALL, BE ALL ON A HOMICIDE CASE.

MOST HOMICIDE CASES AREN'T WON OR LOST BY DNA.

AND LIKE SAME WITH BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE.

IF I AM WEARING MY BODY CAMERA, AND I AM FACING THE SHERIFF, BUT I'M LOOKING THIS WAY TO ADDRESS THE SITUATION OVER HERE, THAT BODY CAMERA CAN'T ALWAYS PICK THAT UP.

AND SO PEOPLE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE THEY'RE A TOOL BUT THAT THEY'RE NOT THE END ALL, BE ALL.

AND TO TIE A CLASS 3 FELONY TO IT, TO SOME OF THOSE ASPECTS I THINK IS A LOT.

>> I WANT TO TURN TO THE QUESTION OF QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

AND THAT'S A TERM THAT WE HADN'T HEARD A LOT ABOUT PRIOR TO THIS BILL.

SEAN SMOOT, FIRST OF ALL FOR MY BENEFIT, DEFINE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND THE ORIGINAL BILLED THAT THE LIMB NATION OF QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

THAT'S NOT IN THIS BILL BUT THERE'S A TASK FORCE IN PLACE TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBLE REFORMS WITH REGARD TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

COULD YOU IN A NUTSHELL EXPLAIN ALL THIS?

>> WELL, SURE, VERY BROADLY, THE LEGAL CONCEPT OF QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS ONE THAT SHIELDS ALL PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES.

IT'S NOT UNIQUE TO POLICE.

IT APPLIES TO JUDGES.

IT APPLIES TO STATES ATTORNEYS, PUBLIC DEFENDERS, LEGISLATORS, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

A PERSON WHO DECIDES WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY GETS A LIQUOR LICENSE.

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY APPLIES TO ALL OF THEM.

AND IT'S A JUDICIAL CONCEPT THAT WAS ESTABLISHED, WELL ESTABLISHED IN FEDERAL LAW THAT ESSENTIALLY SAYS, IF YOU ARE ACTING IN SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC, AND YOU ARE PERFORMING YOUR OFFICIAL DUTIES AS A PUBLIC SERVANT, AND YOU ARE ACTING IN GOOD FAITH, BASED ON WHAT YOU KNOW AT THE TIME, YOU ARE IMMUNE FROM PROSECUTION OR FROM CIVIL LIABILITY.

SO FRANKLY, QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS ESSENTIAL FOR GOVERNMENT TO FUNCTION AT MANY DIFFERENT LEVELS, INCLUDING POLICING.

AND WHAT THE BILL INITIALLY ATTEMPTED TO DO WAS ELIMINATE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.

BUT IT WENT FURTHER THAN THAT.

IT ALSO SOUGHT TO ELIMINATE TORT IMMUNITY FOR OFFICERS AND INDEMNIFICATION FROM THEIR EMPLOYERS WHICH ESSENTIALLY WOULD LAY OFFICERS BARE TO ANY KIND OF CIVIL CLAIM PERSONALLY.

AND FORTUNATELY WE WERE ABLE TO GET THAT PART OF THE BILL REMOVED AT THIS TIME.

BUT AS YOU SAID, THERE'S NOW A TASK FORCE THAT'S GOING TO BE REVIEWING IT.

>> LET ME TURN TO MATT BECAUSE THE ILLINOIS SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION HAS COME OUT AND ASKED THE GOVERNOR TO VETO THIS BILL.

>> CORRECT.

>> WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS GOING TO DO.

THERE ARE SOME LEGISLATORS WHO SAY THEY'RE, HE'S GOING TO SIGN IT.

BUT I THOUGHT MAYBE YOU COULD START THE CONVERSATION, HAVE THE OTHERS JOIN IN HERE IN TERMS OF, YOU ARE NOT OPPOSED TO THE BILL IN ITS ENTIRETY, ARE YOU?

>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.

>> SO WHAT ARE SOME OF THE GOOD POINTS?

AND THEN WHAT ARE SOME OF THE NEGATIVES?

THIS MAY TOUCH ON WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT BUT I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THE IMPRESSION THE POLICE DEPARTMENTS AND SHERIFFS ARE AGAINST THIS ALL AROUND.

> I THINK THERE'S SEVERAL POINTS EVERYBODY AGREES ON.

I THINK THE THINGS THAT ARE QUESTIONABLE IS THE, I GUESS FIRST OF ALL, THAT AFFECTS MY EMPLOYEES THE MOST IS, YOU KNOW, THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS BACK IN BUT NOW THERE'S THIS TASK FORCE.

IS THE PURPOSE OF THE TASK FORCE TO EVALUATE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY TO DETERMINE IF LATER THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO TRY AND ELIMINATE IT?

OR WHAT IS THIS TASK FORCE ACTUALLY GOING TO DO WITH THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AND FOR MY PEOPLE, THAT IS HUGE.

I WOULD SAY.

THE BODY CAMERA I THINK AS A TOOL, WE WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF BODY CAMERAS.

THE PROBLEM IS, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE A SMALL ENOUGH COUNTY, WE'RE OUT TO 2025.

BUT THAT'S 2025 TO HAVE IT IMPLEMENTED.

THAT'S NOT 2025 TO START THINKING ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING.

AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT EQUIPMENT, YOU ARE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT VENDORS.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT COST.

SO IT'S GOING TO TAKE US FROM STARTING FROM ZERO YEARS TO GET MOVING ON THAT.

AND THAT'S ANOTHER THING, YOU KNOW, THAT'S UNFUNDED.

SO WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH THAT MONEY, TOO.

SO -- >> SHAWN CURRY, NOT OPPOSED TO THE BILL IN ITS ENTIRETY, ARE YOU?

>> NO, NOT IN ITS ENTIRETY.

THE ONE THING THAT'S CONCERNING IS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY WAS TAKEN OUT.

BUT A BILL GOT INTRODUCED THIS WEEK TO KIND OF PUT THAT BACK INTO PLACE.

AND THEN WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ACTUAL CRIMINAL CHARGES, FELONY CHARGE, ATTACHED TO SOME OF THAT, SOME OF THE PIECES OF THE LEGISLATION IS WHO DETERMINES THAT?

WHO DETERMINES IF THERE WAS AN INTENT THAT SOMETHING WASN'T PLACED IN A REPORT?

OR WHO'S GOING TO MAKE THAT CALL ON WHETHER SOMEBODY VIOLATED IT TO THE EXTREME POINT THEY'RE GOING TO BE CHARGED WITH A FELONY?

THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY, WE I-THIS IS WHAT IT'S COME DOWN TO.

WE ARE SENDING MEN AND WOMEN INTO SITUATIONS THAT THEY CAN'T CONTROL, RIGHT?

NOBODY CALLS THE POLICE WHEN THINGS ARE GOOD.

THEY CALL THE POLICE WHEN THINGS ARE BAD.

AND THEN THE OFFICERS SHOW UP AND NOW THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER BAD SITUATION THEY GOT CALLED TO.

AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S LIKE, NOW, GO DEAL WITH THIS SITUATION.

BUT IF YOU DON'T DO IT CORRECTLY OR IF ESTHETICSALLY PLEASING, YOU COULD BE SUED NOT ONLY IN YOUR PERSONAL ASPECT, YOUR PERSONAL FINANCE, YOUR HOUSE, YOUR CAR ARE GETTING ASSESSED, THE FEAR IS, WHO IS GOING TO TAKE THAT JOB?

RIGHT NOW IN AMERICA, AND I SEE IT EVER NIGHT WHEN I GO TO WORK EVERY NIGHT.

EVERY SINGLE NIGHT I GO TO WORK, WE GET PEOPLE WHO HATE THE POLICE.

THEY VERBALLY TELL YOU, WE HATE YOU.

IT'S OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

AND SO WE ARE GOING TO GET A SITUATION WHERE IF THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY STAYS, IF SOME OF THE OTHER ASPECTS, IF THAT ENDS UP PASSING, SOME OF THIS OTHER STUFF, IT'S GOING TO BE HARDER AND HARDER TO FIND PEOPLE TO DO THIS JOB.

>> I WANT TO TALK ABOUT RECRUITMENT IN JUST A MOMENT BUT I WANT TO GIVE SEAN SMOOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE BILL OVERALL, IF HE HAS CONCERNS OR SUPPORTS PARTICULAR ASPECTS OF IT.

>> WELL, I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS, OF COURSE.

AND MY MEMBERS HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS.

BUT, YOU KNOW, CONCEPTUALLY, I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD INTENTIONS BEHIND IT.

I JUST DON'T THINK THE BILL WAS, IS GOING TO ACTUALLY DO WHAT I THINK THOSE INTENTIONS WOULD BE.

FOR INSTANCE, YOU BROUGHT UP EARLIER THE ISSUE OF PRETRIAL RELEASE AND CASH BAIL.

LOOK, I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY WHO THINKS THAT WE SHOULD HOLD SOMEONE IN CUSTODY SOLELY BECAUSE THEY CAN'T PAY MONEY.

YOU KNOW, IF SOMEBODY IS RICH AND THEY COMMITTED A MURDER, THEY SHOULD REMAIN IN JAIL AS SHOULD SOMEONE WHO IS POOR THAT COMMITS A MURDER.

BUT THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS DRAFTED IN THIS BILL WOULD REALLY PREVENT JUDGES THE WAY THAT I READ IT, FROM HOLDING AN OFFENDER LIKE FOR INSTANCE THAT HAS MULTIPLE DUI'S OR DRUG OFFENSES, DRUG DEALING OFFENSES AND PEOPLE WHO ILLEGALLY POSSESS AND USE FIREARMS.

UNLESS THEY CAN IDENTIFY A SPECIFIC THREAT TO A PERSON OR PERSONS.

I JUST THINK THAT THE BILL WAS WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT THERE WASN'T ENOUGH TIME FOR INPUT FROM JUDGES, FROM PROSECUTORS, FROM RANK AND FILE POLICE OFFICERS TO REALLY VET THE LANGUAGE AND MEET THE, THE LAUDABLE GOAL OF NOT INCARCERATING PEOPLE SIMPLE LEAF BECAUSE THEY'RE POOR.

>> I WANT TO -- >> AS AN EXAMPLE.

>> I WANT TO RETURN TO THE DISCUSSION ABOUT RECRUITMENT AND TURN TO MATT FIRST AND THEN SHAWN CURRY, IF YOU WOULD.

IT'S BECOMING MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT TO RECRUIT QUALIFIED DEPUTIES.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

IT IS, APPLICANTS ARE WAY DOWN.

AND THAT HAS BEEN A TREND THAT HAS BEEN GOING ON.

BUT I WOULD SAY OVER THE LAST YEAR, THAT HAS REALLY HIT AN ALL-TIME LOW.

WE'RE NOT GETTING NEAR THE APPLICATIONS.

WE'RE NOT GETTING OF THE ONES WE GET, THAT ARE ACTUALLY QUALIFIED, IS MINUSCULE.

AND IN A SMALLER COUNTY LIKE MINE, ALL WE DO IS, I END UP TAKING OFFICERS FROM OTHER SMALLER COMMUNITIES WHO CAN'T REPLACE THEM THEN SO THEN THEY'RE IN DIRE STRAITS TRYING TO FIND THEM.

AND WE KIND OF PLAY THIS GAME BECAUSE WE'RE JUST NOT GETTING AN AMOUNT OF QUALIFIED APPLICANTS THAT WANT TO BE POLICE OFFICERS ANYMORE.

>> AND IN TURN, YOU MIGHT LOSE A DEPUTY WHO A LARGER POLICE FORCE.

>> SURE.

WE'VE HAD THAT HAPPEN, TOO.

WE'VE HAD DEPUTIES THAT OVER THE LAST YEAR WE'VE HAD SEVERAL DEPUTIES THAT THEY'RE DONE.

THEY WENT INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

THEY'RE OUT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.

>> SEAN SMOOT, YOU WANTED TO ADD TO THAT?

>> I WOULD JUST SAY I DO A LOT OF WORK NATIONALLY IN ADDITION TO MY WORK HERE IN ILLINOIS.

AND I CAN AND TELL YOU IT'S A NATIONAL CRISIS, POLICE REABSOLUTE CRUETING.

AS THE SHERIFF MENTIONED, IT'S A STRUGGLE IN A DEPARTMENT LIKE HIS.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU IN DEPARTMENTS AS LARGE AS NEW YORK CITY, YOU KNOW, IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM.

AND IT'S REALLY BEEN EXACERBATED BY SOME OF THE REALLY DIFFICULT CASES THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT HAS HAD COME UP IN THE LAST FEW YEARS.

AND CERTAINLY IT'S NOT THE, THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE AS SHAWN CURRY MENTIONED THAT HAVE VERY STRONG ANTI-POLICE SENTIMENTS BECAUSE OF EVENTS THAT OCCURRED IN MINNEAPOLIS AND OTHER PLACES.

AND A LOT OF PRESS CONFERENCE ON THOSE THINGS.

THAT HAS A REALLY SERIOUS IMPACT.

AND TO THE SHERIFF'S POINT, AND THIS IS WHAT'S NEW, IN ADDITION TO THE HIRING CRISIS AND THE RECRUITING CRISIS, THERE IS NOW A RETENTION CRISIS.

IN THAT MOST PEOPLE THAT CAME INTO POLICING, IF THEY LASTED THROUGH SEVEN TO 10 YEARS, IT WAS THEIR CAREER.

THEY STAYED FOR THE REST OF THEIR CAREER AS A POLICE OFFICER.

THAT'S NOT TRUE ANYMORE.

THE NUMBER IS GROWING HIGHER AND HIGHER OF OFFICERS.

THERE'S A COHORT THAT LEAVES PRIOR TO FIVE YEARS, AND NOW THERE'S A NEW COHORT THAT LEAVES AFTER 10 YEARS, IN BETWEEN 10 AND 25 YEARS.

AND THAT NUMBER IS GROWING.

WE'RE LOSING THEM TO PRIVATE SECTOR.

WE'RE LOSING THEM TO OTHER PUBLIC SECTOR JOBS.

>> WE'VE ABOUT A MINUTE OR LESS LEFT.

AND MORE ON RECRUITMENT FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, SHAWN.

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO GET ANY BETTER.

AND FROM WORKING IN AN URBAN SETTING, AND SEEING SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT THESE GUYS DEAL WITH, NOBODY WANTS TO COME TO WORK FOR A JOB WHERE THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'RE HATED.

AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A SENSE OF INSTITUTIONAL BETRAYAL BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT THAT HIRED YOU TURNED AROUND AND THEY FEEL THAT THEY'RE GETTING BETRAYED BY SOME OF THIS LEGISLATION.

>> WE HAVE RUN OUT OF OUR HALF HOUR OF TIME.

I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.

MATT SMITH, WOODFORD COUNTY SHERIFF.

FROM ZAUN CURRY WITH THE TRAINING RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

AND SEAN SMOOT, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE POLICE BENEVOLENTPROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION.

THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FROM SPRINGFIELD.

AND WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON "AT ISSUE."

WE WILL BE BACK NEXT TIME WITH ANOTHER EDITION OF THE PROGRAM.

THANKS FOR BEING WITH US.

Captioning Performed By LNS Captioning www.LNScaptioning.com