(Click the image above to download a pdf of this flyer.)

Mr. Kelly has so far demurred. He acknowledges that the attention and favorable poll numbers are flattering. But he says he loves running the biggest municipal police force in the country.

No doubt he does.

Another cop, a cinder block of a man named Adhyl Polanco, also loves the New York Police Department. Or he did until he ran afoul of a body he describes as ever more consumed with writing nuisance tickets, executing dubious stop-and-frisks and arrests, and manipulating crime reports.

It’s also a department, he discovered, that squashes any hint of dissent.

Officer Polanco said his supervisors in the 41st Precinct in the Bronx instructed him to slap handcuffs on teenagers guilty of nothing more than a boisterous walk to school. They told him to change reports of felony burglaries and attempted murder to far less serious charges of trespass and reckless endangerment.

In 2009, he detailed his complaints in a long letter to Internal Affairs. He had tape-recorded several of these incidents. Many months later, the department filed charges against him — for filing false arrest papers.

“They teach us to lie about stopping people. They teach us to lie about tickets, and ruin lives,” said Officer Polanco, who after about a decade on the force is suspended with pay. “I’ve never been a disciplinary problem. The only problem came when I decided to open my mouth.”

This, too, is Mr. Kelly’s police force, a department that can claim many victories but is consumed by a single imperative: crime and homicide rates must keep falling. Question this and top police officials offer a catchall answer: Do you want New York City to return to the bad old days?

There’s no definitive proof that top officials systematically manipulate crime data and set arrest quotas. But officers have stepped forward in recent years to talk of such practices in widely scattered precincts: Adrian Schoolcraft in the 81st in Brooklyn, and Chris Bienz in Queens. All of them, along with Officer Polanco, spoke first to Graham Rayman of The Village Voice and Jim Hoffer of the local ABC affiliate. Two officers from Brooklyn detailed near-identical complaints for me recently, although they requested anonymity. The department has said repeatedly that it is examining the many accusations of manipulation of crime data, though an internal report vindicated Officer Schoolcraft.

Officer Polanco, who was suspended more than two years ago, and five former officers gathered last week in Greenwich Village at a forum organized by the Police Reform Organizing Project. They talked not of petty grievances but, with passionate and pained words, of good police practices trampled.

“Make no mistake: There are quotas, and that is illegal,” a former New York City police captain, John A. Eterno, told the audience.

Mr. Eterno, as it happens, is a particularly difficult critic to dismiss. Once he trained officers to stop and frisk. Now a professor at Molloy College, he and Professor Eli Silverman of John Jay College of Criminal Justice surveyed more than 100 retired police captains, and detail their findings in their recent book “The Crime Numbers Game: Management by Manipulation.”

The former captains spoke of an unrelenting, often unethical pressure to manipulate crime statistics. In addition, the professors studied police and health data and found weird divergences. City hospital data shows a 90 percent increase in emergency room visits for assaults from 1999 to 2006. But police data for the same period records a nearly 50 percent decrease in assaults.

The Police Department launched a counterattack against the professors. Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg offered a shrug. “There’s always going to be some fudging of the numbers, but it is tiny,” he said, adding that the study “was paid for by one of the unions.”

As it happens, the mayor is incorrect. Molloy College paid for the study. “Any suggestion of a chink in the armor of the ‘N.Y.P.D. success story’ is very threatening. You’re excommunicated,” says Mr. Silverman. “It’s the holy of holies.”

Officer Polanco knows the life of a heretic. He has surrendered his badge and gun. Once, as a child in crime-ravaged Washington Heights, he dreamed of being a police officer. Now he passes restless days, fighting anger as he cares for three sons.

“It’s a shame to get paid for doing nothing,” he says. “How can I live with myself, how could I face my wife, if I didn’t speak up?” That might be a reasonable question for a commissioner contemplating a mayoral run.

‘A Step Forward’ for Jobseekers with Criminal Records

The mass incarceration of minority communities, and the resulting mass reentry and lifetime collateral consequences, have created the “perfect storm” to ensure that criminal record-based employment discrimination serves as a surrogate for race-based discrimination.

Jobseekers with criminal records are often at the “back of the line.” In the current economy, that line has grown considerably.

But on April 25, 2012, in a 4-1 bipartisan vote, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) showed tremendous leadership and courage by issuing a revised guidance encouraging the hiring of individuals with records by clarifying the application of Title VII to criminal records.

This decision gives jobseekers with criminal records a renewed opportunity to successfully enter the labor market.

But the by-product of mass incarceration—mass reentry—means that this year alone 700,000 people will return to their communities from prison.

Millions more will cycle through our courts and jails or be placed under some other form of correctional supervision. More than half of these men and women come from and return to impoverished communities that are under resourced and ill-equipped to respond to the large number of returning citizens.

On their return to the community, these individuals are expected to find and maintain gainful employment. And, let there be no mistake, those that can work want to work.

However, over the past few decades, state and local legislatures have promulgated a wide array of laws and policies that make it increasingly difficult for people with criminal records to enter the labor market successfully— even for those who have fully paid their debt to society and have demonstrated that they are not a threat and are capable of becoming productive, tax-paying citizens.

Legal restrictions, occupational bars, inadvertent and deliberate employment discrimination practices, and the cultural stigma associated with having a criminal record have prevented many of these people – especially those who come from economically distressed communities of color – from obtaining employment and other necessities of life.

In addition, researchers from around the country confirm that the majority of private- sector employers have little or no interest in hiring people with criminal records, especially those recently released from state and federal correctional facilities.

When many individuals inevitably fail to reintegrate and are re-incarcerated, they are not the only ones who suffer. So do their families, communities and indeed the entire country; valuable lives are wasted, the public is less safe, and justice is diminished

Finding effective ways to manage their reentry into society and the workforce is critical to promoting public safety and curbing recidivism rates and the high costs of re-incarceration.

The new guidance supersedes the original version issued in 1987, and reminds employers that criminal record policies have a disparate impact based on race and national origin.

According to the new guidelines, employers must consider the age and seriousness of the offense, and its relevance to the job the applicant is applying for.Employers must also now conduct individualized assessments when screening applicants with criminal records.

This new provision will offer qualified jobseekers a chance to explain their involvement with the criminal justice system, in addition to providing them an opportunity to share evidence of rehabilitation. This will help to level the playing field and offer jobseekers with criminal records a chance to compete on the merits, once their criminal record is taken into account.

Surprisingly, the new guidance also encourages employers to consider recent research on “desistance,” when designing their human resource policies. This is an especially important provision, since most employers rely on often ill-informed and misguided notions about risk and recidivism.

The EEOC’s action is a welcome step forward.

The labor market has changed considerably since the EEOC’s last issued guidance. Changes in technology have greatly increased employer access to personal background information and more small and medium-sized employers obtain criminal background information.

According to The Fortune Society’s research, and its experiences working with employers to place its reentry clients, businesses want to hire individuals with records, and are looking for knowledge on how to make informed decisions on using criminal justice information.

EEOC’s updated guidance will provide that information, and will aid these employers by expanding the labor pool of much-needed qualified workers.

Read the article at The Crime Report.

There is no proof that the zero-tolerance policing adopted by New York and other cities in the 1990’s had anything to do with the decline in violent crime across the nation. Crime also dropped in jurisdictions that did not use the approach.

Millions of people have been arrested under the policy for minor violations, like possession of small amounts of marijuana. And one thing is beyond dispute: this arrest-first policy has filled the courts to bursting with first-time, minor offenders who do not belong there and wreaked havoc with people’s lives. Even when cases are dismissed, people can be shadowed for years by error-ridden criminal records.

The human toll is evident in New York City, where last year 50,000 people — one every 10 minutes — were arrested for possession of small amounts of marijuana. The city downplays the significance, saying these cases are typically dismissed and the record sealed if the person stays out of trouble for a year. But getting tangled in the court system is harrowing. And the record-keeping can be unreliable and far more porous than the city suggests.

An analysis by the Legal Action Center, which assists 2,500 people with criminal records each year, has found that nearly half of its clients’ rap sheets have errors. Defense lawyers say that too often the courts and police fail to report to the state about dismissals and other outcomes favorable to defendants.

As for “sealed” records, background-screening companies working for private employers can harvest data at the time of an arrest and there is no guarantee that they will update to reflect dismissals — or expunge the information when records are sealed by the courts. While it is illegal to exclude people from jobs based solely on arrest or convictions, unless there is a compelling business reason for doing so, many employers quickly write off applicants who are flagged in these databases.

New York City drove up its marijuana arrests — from just under 1,500 in 1980 to more than 50,000 a year today — despite the fact that the State Legislature in 1977 decriminalized possession of 25 grams or less of marijuana, making it a violation, roughly akin to a traffic ticket. The problem is that the Legislature made public display of any amount of marijuana a misdemeanor, which can lead to arrest, jail and a record that follows the person for years. And New York’s police have been repeatedly accused of arresting people for possession after forcing them to show “in public” the small amounts they had. Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly tacitly admitted this practice last year, directing officers to make an arrest only when the drug really was in view.

Critics say the fact that 87 percent of those arrested are black or Hispanic suggests that the police are deliberately singling out minority citizens for arrests that push some of them permanently to the very margins of society.

An arrest, even without a conviction, can swiftly unleash disastrous personal consequences. Consider the 2011 case of a 26-year-old single mother from Brooklyn whose lawyers say she was arrested after the police forced her to reveal a small packet of marijuana hidden in her purse. The judge said the charges would be dismissed if she stayed out of trouble for a year. A week later, the woman had been fired from her job as a janitor with the New York City Housing Authority. She has not been rehired.

The city’s Housing Authority convenes a termination hearing when a tenant is arrested. The authority says no one is evicted for low-level marijuana arrests “in and of themselves.” But Steven Banks, attorney-in-chief of the Legal Aid Society, which represents 30,000 people in minor marijuana arrests a year, says these cases often end with the leaseholder ejecting the person arrested — perhaps a son or grandson — to avoid eviction. People convicted of some misdemeanors cannot apply for public housing for three years; those convicted of violations are ineligible for two years.

Young parents have faced neglect accusations in family court after marijuana arrests, even if they are not ultimately charged with any crime. In a case described in The Times, a woman’s son and niece were removed from her home by child welfare workers after police found about a third of an ounce of marijuana — below the threshold for a misdemeanor — in a boyfriend’s backpack in her Bronx apartment. The district attorney declined to prosecute, but the children spent time in foster care, and her niece was not returned for over a year.

New York City’s overly zealous marijuana arrests, coupled with the unreliability and porousness of record-keeping, damage the lives of tens of thousands of people a year. The Legislature needs to fix this. It must drop the public-display distinction for marijuana, which invites far too many abuses. It should also press law enforcement officials and the court system to make sure that criminal records are more accurate to start with and that people who are victimized by errors have a plausible way of getting them corrected.

Employers and government agencies also have a responsibility here. They must not rush to their own judgment about minor offenders.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg needs to recognize that zero-tolerance policing is not the panacea his Police Department seems to think it is. The police need to spend more time tracking down serious crime and less on minor offenses. There is nothing minor about a record that can follow people for the rest of their lives.

More information and guidelines for submission can be found HERE.

Building People, Not Prisons, Since 1967

We need fleet-footed runners who can help us raise money for The Fortune Society, ranked by Philanthropedia as the #1 nonprofit organization in local criminal justice in 2011.

The money you raise as a member of Fortune’s 2012 ING New York City Marathon Team - The Fortune Society Flyers - will help strengthen vital programs, including education, health, housing, substance abuse treatment and employment services for previously incarcerated men and women. It will also help us continue our strong advocacy to rectify unjust criminal justice policies through the David Rothenberg Center for Public Policy (DRCPP).

In exchange for your generous investment of blood, sweat and tears, you’ll get help with marathon training and fundraising, assistance from an army of enthusiastic volunteers on race day, and the official Fortune Society Flyers t-shirt.

Visit the ING NYC Marathon for more information about the charity program or contact John Runowicz at jrunowicz@fortunesociety.org or 212.691.7554.

Realistically Speaking

I recently had a conversation with a formerly incarcerated individual regarding reentry.  They had observed a lot of people coming out of prison with unrealistic expectations. A formerly incarcerated individual often may have a long-term goal but no short-term steps to achieve that goal. Furthermore, the long-term goal does not adequately reflect the individual’s current ability to fulfill the requirements necessary to achieve their goal.

For example, a common theme for the formerly incarcerated is entrepreneurship.  This is a great long-term goal. However, becoming a successful entrepreneur is almost impossible without having adequately prepared while in prison.  People who are adequately prepared in both their game plan and resources are usually successful.  In terms of the big picture of successful reentry, if your only plan to provide income is unsuccessful, what other realistic options are there for you?

Personally speaking, my game plan when I returned to society was not to go back to prison (long-term).  I knew that I would have to obtain employment.  To help solve this huge piece of the puzzle I came to Fortune. I had the same lofty goals of saving the world, but others who had walked the road before me assisted me. They had to “deflate” me so to speak, but they helped me to stay realistic, and in turn helped me maintain successful reentry.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

(This profile was written by Alvaro for the Summer 2010 issue of the Fortune News, available for download here.)

My name is Alvaro Cumberbatch, and I’m the 28-year-old son of a loving single mother. I also just finished a six-and-a-half-year bid for robbery in the first degree. No one saw it coming when I was convicted in 2004. I was a good kid with a good job – I didn’t need to do that crime. But I wanted to be accepted within my group of childhood friends, and so I committed robbery with them just to fit in. Basically, I went to prison because I was a follower.

I heard a lot of great things about Fortune when I was upstate at Mid-Orange [Correctional Facility]. So after my release in February 2010, I decided to stop in and learn more. I had developed a passion for HIV/AIDS Counseling, and one of my immediate concerns was how I’d get a job in the field – especially with a felony and no outside experience. I thought the best route would be to have a reputable agency like Fortune give me some formal training and help me find a good placement.

When I first started with Employment Services, one of the facilitators told me that roughly 75% of Fortune staff had histories of incarceration, homelessness, or substance abuse. At first I didn’t believe it. Then several people shared their stories with me, and I realized that it’s not only true – it goes all the way to the top. Fortune executives like Glenn Martin and Stanley Richards have actually been incarcerated. Coming in off the street, that’s encouraging to me. It proves my goals are achievable too.

A public forum featuring current and former NYPD officers speaking about their experiences on the job and presenting their critique of current NYPD policies and tactics. For more information, please click HERE.

The accumulation of NYPD woes and discontent make it look as if Commissioner Ray Kelly was suffering from something more than third-term drift. It looks as if he may be losing control of his department.  Read the article HERE.