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 Oregonâs largest municipal police force.
The Mercuryâin a 15-minute slot sandwiched between other media outletsâsat down with her on Tuesday to talk about her priorities, the (many) officers who donât live in Portland, and protest policing.
MERCURY: Youâve mentioned that you need to get a sense of the culture here. Outside of that, whatâs your first priority as chief?
DANIELLE OUTLAW: That is it, thatâs 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 managementâthose are day-to-day activities, a part of policing and issues weâre facing. I donât like to use the word âissues,â because it sounds like itâs a bad thing. Itâs just something thatâs an area of attention.
As weâre talking about these things, we canât 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, theyâll become acclimated to who I am, and weâll work hand-in-hand to move forward. But itâs all simultaneous workâitâs not like Iâm gonna meet with you first today, and then tomorrow weâre gonna work on the settlement agreement. Itâs all an ongoing thing because we donât have the luxury of time, even though it is a marathon and not a sprint.Â
Do you have an idea yet about your command staffâbringing in new assistant chiefs or keeping the current ones?Â
Iâm only on day two. As Iâve shared with themâno secrets hereâitâs really about making sure that folks are in the right seats. Thereâs a lot of talent here, and I want to make sure weâre as efficient and effective as possible. If there is a time to make some shifts and moves, thatâs what Iâll do. But Iâm not there yet. Iâm still getting to know people, and theyâre still getting to know me, getting to know whoâs responsible for what.
But is it realistic to expect new assistant chiefs to come in?
I donât know. Itâs not fair to them, itâs not fair to anybody to come in and say Iâm going to change the staff completely without having an opportunity to show me whatâs been done. Itâs too soon to say.Â
Most Portland police officers donât live in Portland. Is that a problem to you?
No, itâs notâas long as they can get here when I need them here. Itâs one thing to be from somewhere, homegrown, but you can also be made somewhere. I know a lot of folks from my previous agency arenât 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 doesnât choose to live within the city doesnât mean youâre not made here in Portland, arenât part of the culture, and not connected. I would even say thereâs a special connection there. When youâre 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 weâre judging police officers, theyâre not the only ones that do that. Other people in other professions commute as well, and it doesnât mean theyâre any less connected.Â

So you donât believe that officers who donât live in the community they police have less connection to the area?
I would be remiss in my comments if I didnât acknowledge that. There is some truth there, but thatâs where you focus on the person. Thatâs 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 theyâre 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 Iâll 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, Iâm okay with that. My preference is to be close, but thatâs just a personal preference because I work long hours, and Iâm very committed to what I do. Iâm very hands on.
And commuting sucks.Â
That traffic is no joke.Â
Protests in Portland are very big, and get a lot of attention. Thereâs 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 wonât say whether itâs 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 itâs my role to ensure that our membership is safe and doing that.
The flip side is, whoâs our audience? The unfortunate thing is we could have peaceful demonstrators out there, but we all know that there are agitators, that will intentionallyâitâs a strategyâembed themselves within a crowd, mask up, and cause damage. Tactically, are there some ways we can address that? Yes, and thatâs a discussion to be had for another time. But our job is to make sure that everyoneâs First Amendment right is protected, but itâs done safely. Weâll take so muchâthereâs 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 wonât be accepted or tolerated.Â
In a crowd of hundreds or thousands, thereâll 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.Â
I totally understand what youâre saying. What Iâm getting at is itâs too early for me to pass judgment on what should or shouldnât be done here. There are always areas of improvement, and I totally get the discussion that youâre having because we, as police officers, get frustrated when weâre brushed with the same broad strokeâwhen one or two officers do something and now the whole entire profession is painted. Itâs the same thing, I totally get it, and it doesnât help with folks trusting us. On the one hand, Iâm saying we protect your First Amendment right to free speech, but Iâm not letting you [speak freely]. I get it. But there has to be balance and thereâs 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?
Itâs my second day!
But are they important for you?
I am a huge proponent of cameras as a risk management tool. Thereâs a lot of benefit, all around, for everyone as far as accountability goes. But itâs only one tool. Cost is obviously something that will need to be addressed and hopefully itâs something I can push forward and make happen.