Danielle Outlaw, a 42-year-old former Deputy Chief of the Oakland Police Department, was sworn in on Monday as chief of the Portland Police Bureau. A rare outside hire, Outlaw is just the third woman, and first woman of color, to lead Oregonās largest municipal police force.
The Mercuryāin a 15-minute slot sandwiched between other media outletsāsat down with her on Tuesday to talk about her priorities, the (many) officers who donāt live in Portland, and protest policing.
MERCURY: Youāve mentioned that you need to get a sense of the culture here. Outside of that, whatās your first priority as chief?
DANIELLE OUTLAW: That is it, thatās my first priority. There are a lot of topics that come up around staffing, community relationship building, [US Department of Justice] settlement agreement stuff, crowd managementāthose are day-to-day activities, a part of policing and issues weāre facing. I donāt like to use the word āissues,ā because it sounds like itās a bad thing. Itās just something thatās an area of attention.
As weāre talking about these things, we canāt forget the people who are doing the work to get these things done. So my very first priority is to make sure people see me, I meet the people within the organization, sworn staff and non-sworn staff, and the community. The movers and the shakers. I just want them to get to know me, what my style is, who I am, and that happens over time.
This is only my second day, but as they see my face more, theyāll become acclimated to who I am, and weāll work hand-in-hand to move forward. But itās all simultaneous workāitās not like Iām gonna meet with you first today, and then tomorrow weāre gonna work on the settlement agreement. Itās all an ongoing thing because we donāt have the luxury of time, even though it is a marathon and not a sprint.Ā
Do you have an idea yet about your command staffābringing in new assistant chiefs or keeping the current ones?Ā
Iām only on day two. As Iāve shared with themāno secrets hereāitās really about making sure that folks are in the right seats. Thereās a lot of talent here, and I want to make sure weāre as efficient and effective as possible. If there is a time to make some shifts and moves, thatās what Iāll do. But Iām not there yet. Iām still getting to know people, and theyāre still getting to know me, getting to know whoās responsible for what.
But is it realistic to expect new assistant chiefs to come in?
I donāt know. Itās not fair to them, itās not fair to anybody to come in and say Iām going to change the staff completely without having an opportunity to show me whatās been done. Itās too soon to say.Ā
Most Portland police officers donāt live in Portland. Is that a problem to you?
No, itās notāas long as they can get here when I need them here. Itās one thing to be from somewhere, homegrown, but you can also be made somewhere. I know a lot of folks from my previous agency arenāt from Oakland, but they had maybe come over from the military and landed there. But they spent so much time at work and in the community, and much less time where they actually live, that they were made in Oakland, they were still part of the Oakland culture. Same goes here. But I think what a lot of folks fail to realize is that we spend so much time here.
Because someone doesnāt choose to live within the city doesnāt mean youāre not made here in Portland, arenāt part of the culture, and not connected. I would even say thereās a special connection there. When youāre in certain neighborhoods day in and day out, you get to know the people there, and what drives that community, what the areas of concern are, what makes that particular area tick. Some officers might be more a part of that area than people who actually live there, because they, themselves, may be commuting outside [of Portland]. One of the first things I learned is people [civilians] commute from Washington. They just work here. I want to be clear that when weāre judging police officers, theyāre not the only ones that do that. Other people in other professions commute as well, and it doesnāt mean theyāre any less connected.Ā
So you donāt believe that officers who donāt live in the community they police have less connection to the area?
I would be remiss in my comments if I didnāt acknowledge that. There is some truth there, but thatās where you focus on the person. Thatās where you focus on the values of the organization, and making sure that what we value is aligned with everything we do: our policy, how we interact with people. If I hire someone from out of the city and theyāre commuting, but I know they have a heart of gold, I know they have solid interpersonal skills, their emotional intelligence is through the roof, I know Iāll be comfortable with that person in any neighborhood, because they have the ability to empathize with those that may not be like them. As long as you can get to work on time and you respond when I need you, Iām okay with that. My preference is to be close, but thatās just a personal preference because I work long hours, and Iām very committed to what I do. Iām very hands on.
And commuting sucks.Ā
That traffic is no joke.Ā
Protests in Portland are very big, and get a lot of attention. Thereās disagreement between activists and the police about what an appropriate level of policing looks like. Is it a good thing for police officers to show up to protests wearing full body armor?
I wonāt say whether itās good or bad. I think the tone of the crowd really dictates the response. Folks tend to forget that we have a job to do, and itās my role to ensure that our membership is safe and doing that.
The flip side is, whoās our audience? The unfortunate thing is we could have peaceful demonstrators out there, but we all know that there are agitators, that will intentionallyāitās a strategyāembed themselves within a crowd, mask up, and cause damage. Tactically, are there some ways we can address that? Yes, and thatās a discussion to be had for another time. But our job is to make sure that everyoneās First Amendment right is protected, but itās done safely. Weāll take so muchāthereās give and take on both sides that has to happen. But throwing things, projectiles and all that, at officers that are just there to ensure safety, it just wonāt be accepted or tolerated.Ā
In a crowd of hundreds or thousands, thereāll be a few assholes throwing stuff and then all of a sudden the flash-bang grenades are coming out, the pepper spray is coming out, the loudspeaker is telling everybody to leave or get arrested.Ā
I totally understand what youāre saying. What Iām getting at is itās too early for me to pass judgment on what should or shouldnāt be done here. There are always areas of improvement, and I totally get the discussion that youāre having because we, as police officers, get frustrated when weāre brushed with the same broad strokeāwhen one or two officers do something and now the whole entire profession is painted. Itās the same thing, I totally get it, and it doesnāt help with folks trusting us. On the one hand, Iām saying we protect your First Amendment right to free speech, but Iām not letting you [speak freely]. I get it. But there has to be balance and thereās no one cookie-cutter way to address each and every one because they all change, the crowds change, the tones change.
When can we expect body cameras?
Itās my second day!
But are they important for you?
I am a huge proponent of cameras as a risk management tool. Thereās a lot of benefit, all around, for everyone as far as accountability goes. But itās only one tool. Cost is obviously something that will need to be addressed and hopefully itās something I can push forward and make happen.
