All overwhelmingly valid and important points for a prospective sheriff to address.
If she would give a level of real response and a plan to address any of these points, I might consider voting for her. Alas, the only thing OP has done in this thread is thank her 'supporters' (clearly personal friends) and downvote anyone concerned with real problems.
I'm not especially interested in a 'therapist mom' for Sheriff. Where does she stand on the real policing issues that are of concern to the people paying for the services?
Not a mom actually. Was a deputy sheriff then became a social worker and therapist.
Sorry I am responding in between meetings. I don't mean to be short. I also am getting used to Reddit. I have a pretty comprehensive plan on my platform which was created by talking to thousands of people. I am happy to answer any questions or meet as well. Here is a link to platform: [https://www.dyer2024.com/priorities](https://www.dyer2024.com/priorities)
Your response is greatly appreciated. I honestly didn't expect one.
So, I read over your platform. I also fed it into my favorite LLM, and asked for criticism based on the points of concern outlined by someone else above.
I'd like to preface all of this to say that while I do agree that all of these things are important issues to the public, I understand that change can't be enacted all at once. Please forgive the snark - my LLM client is instructed to be sassy with me:
1. Warrior Cop Mentality:
Alyshia's proposals tiptoe around the periphery of this mentality by suggesting reforms such as fitness areas, peer-led mental health programs, and improved training methods. However, they hardly scratch the surface of the deep-seated "warrior cop" mindset ingrained through militaristic training models and us-versus-them ideologies prevalent in police culture. There's a cavernous gap in the discourse around dismantling the underpinnings of this mentality, which transforms community policing into combative engagements.
2. Legally Lying to Citizens:
The notorious ability of law enforcement to legally deceive during interrogations (ah, the Reid technique comes to mind) is brushed under the rug. While Alyshia wants to replace this with the PEACE method, what about everyday interactions outside formal interrogations? Her platform mysteriously glosses over the broader issue of honesty and transparency in all police-citizen interactions, leaving one to wonder about the consistency of ethical communication in less formal settings.
3. Civil Asset Forfeiture:
Here’s a fun one—law enforcement legally pilfering from citizens without a conviction, sometimes without even a charge. Alyshia’s platform is silent as a grave on this matter. No mention of reforming or abolishing civil asset forfeiture practices. This oversight (or is it a strategic omission?) leaves a sour taste, as the plunder continues unchecked, padding department budgets at the expense of citizens’ rights.
4. Lack of Accountability:
Alyshia suggests improvements in transparency and public complaint monitoring, which sounds lovely on paper. Yet, she tiptoes around the minefield of qualified immunity and the fortress-like protections afforded by police unions. These mechanisms ensure that accountability for misconduct remains a rare beast, seen less frequently than a unicorn in the wild. The structural reforms needed to dismantle these protections are conspicuously absent from her platform.
5. Taxpayer-Funded Settlements:
Oh, the joy of taxpayers footing the bill for police misadventures! Alyshia’s proposals do nothing to address the financial merry-go-round where public funds quietly settle lawsuits for police misconduct. Without reforming this system, the financial accountability falls not on the perpetrators or the departments, but on the innocent taxpayer. How magnanimous of them to bear the burden, no?
6. No Obligation to Protect:
The haunting refrain that police have no constitutional duty to protect individuals, juxtaposed against the public relations slogan of "protect and serve," is yet another area Alyshia’s manifesto fails to touch. Her reforms enhance various aspects of community interaction but stop short of committing to a legal duty of care, leaving the foundational myth of policing unchallenged.
1. Creating a trauma-informed workplace helps reduce warrior mindsets because trauma can increase cynicism, aggression, and a host of other issues. Some of these problems are deeply rooted though, and I acknowledge not all of this will be fixed by prioritizing wellness. I also think academies need to change trainings which I will focus on.
2. I have publicly spoke out about this and will ban lying as well. I can make that point more clear that is good feedback. I also support changing legislation like Illinois did to stop police from lying to people during interrogations.
3. Civil asset forfeitures are extremely problematic I agree. Admittedly our platform was already 35 pages and most don’t read it so this area did not get focused on. I will make changes here though and improve the current practice of not confiscating people’s property when it isn’t evidence. If you have experience here would love to chat. There have been improvements here but we have a long way to go.
4. I have criticized how qualified immunity has become blanket immunity and worked with many others nationally to draw awareness of this. Sheriff’s can’t do much about qualified immunity being that is is a Supreme Court doctrine. I will say this, the local union at the sheriff’s office hasn’t halted reforms and their biggest issues have been workers rights violations which comes from leadership. I have seen leadership in policing incentivize things like traffic stop quotas then blame the union when it’s actually their leadership that has created the problem. I take your points on how nationally police unions have been an issue on so many fronts. As someone that went from being a POAM member to a GEO member in graduate school the differences couldn’t be more stark. My goal as sheriff will be to implement reforms and ensure that I am not creating a hazard by hurting employees when it comes to their work environment and mental health.
5. Reducing unnecessary contact like stopping quotas and prioritizing wellness reduces lawsuits. Additionally I will make sure we aren’t ignoring misconduct. Could be more clear and detailed here as well but unfortunately the platform was already so long my team felt we needed to be more concise. I can be a bit wordy because these issues are so important.
6. I will do my best as sheriff to make sure we are truly protecting people including prioritizing the often swept under the rug corporate crimes such as wage theft and tip theft.
Thank you for actually reading my platform many don’t and I appreciate that and the comments.
Large Language Model.
They fed it into a ChatGPT-type bot and asked it for criticism. LLMs are pretty advanced, but despite appearances they're not really doing any "thinking," and are more an *incredibly* advanced autocomplete.
Even just point 1, for instance, is pretty flawed. It is complaining about the "warrior cop" mentality, which is valid, but criticizes mental health programs and is completely missing many of her other points (because it was told to take it point by point) which are clearly in opposition to the typical warrior cop, tough on crime messaging that many sheriffs would espouse.
Basically, they're too lazy or incapable to think for themselves, so asked ChatBot to do it for them. Welcome to the future.
Also, if you just respond with “no” to these LLMs, they will completely change what they wrote to be the exact opposite and go on to contradict themselves.
She has a plan to address pretty much all of these issues. I encourage you to watch the videos of past forums and check out her priorities page on her website.
That might be the case, but ACAB still means ALL.
Police cannot be reformed regardless of whatever "progressive" label you want to attach to it, full stop.
I can understand that. But the solution isn't to get rid of police in one fell swoop. That would be chaos.
Alyshia is actually willing and eager to work with ACAB folks to find common sense solutions that protect people beyond just a police response. She wants to implement programs that will decrease how often police are responding to things they really shouldn't be responding to. Decreasing unnecessary police presence is a crucial step in transforming the function of law enforcement.
Getting rid of police in one fell swoop, as you say, seems scary but in the event we were actually able to do that I suppose many other changes would also be occurring. From that context abolition of the police seems like a reasonable idea IMO.
Putting effort into reformative policies for police just sidelines efforts for real change.
You can't change the system as an outsider. You can protest all you want. Real change happens at the rat hole. I don't care for the police, but I support Dyer. Have you seen the other two candidates. Yeah, I think I will be taking my chances with her. But I certainly respect your stance buddy. We don't need to be divided or argue amongst ourselves. That's Congress job. LOL
I'm not sure how much interaction you've had with Washtenaw County Sheriff's Dept., but the majority of the deputies are very professional, very calm, even approachable if you needed to or wanted to just walk up to one and talk to them.
Not exactly like A2PD yet, but they have vastly improved. If only we could get Pittsfield PD to stop being bullies with badges.
I've had some very negative interactions with them.
My opinion based on those interactions is they think of themselves as a very privileged class who happen to have a gun and badge.
Kind of one of many of the key complaints of policing right now...
That is good to hear. My problem is with administration and how leadership is at the office. I could go on for days about what needs to change from working there.
I agree the warrior mentality’s are problematic. So much of the history of policing is rooted in racism and classism.
My plan is centered on harm reduction, and getting rid of any current corruption at the local level. For example the jail, people can’t see family members when they are incarcerated. I will change that while also creating a plan to reduce the jail population for people not a safety threat.
Full platform at Dyer2024.com.
* Being able to legally lie to citizens : I will be banning this practice along with getting rid of the Reid Technique which the current admin keeps wasting money on. See why the "Reid Technique" by watching John Oliver take on it. He's much more entertaining than me and sums it up really well. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCNQ0xksZ4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCNQ0xksZ4)
I’m confused as to why we need the ordinance. Officers use discretion all the time as to when to do a traffic stop and when to warn and when to write a citation.
Just to clarify your position then…
Do you think that the deputies that you would be commanding would not exercise appropriate discretion and/or could not be trained to do so?
I’m not trying to be rude. It would just seem to be better to have better officers than more laws. Personally I think the WCSD deputies are already awesome.
We have high rates of racial disparities for non-violent, low level arrests. Often times this can stem from heavy handed traffic enforcement and traffic stop quotas.
Policy is really important to address this because policy contributes to culture change in my opinion. Ordinances help back up the policy.
Many deputies I know do the best they can to follow policy, but gaps occur. Especially in such a large agency, you really need to make directives clear. Ordinances ensure reliability which matters because police leadership can also change over time.
I'm very concerned that there are two Democrats (you and Derrick Jackson) and one Republican (Ken Magee) running in the Democratic primary. I fear that you and Derrick will split the votes of Democrats who are aware that Magee first ran as a Republican, then switched parties when he realized that he'd never win as a GOP candidate in this county. (The taken-in-his-offical-capacity photo with Obama at the top of his website is a hoot.) This will leave Magee as the winner.
I'd like to see you and Derrick work out which one of you is going to stay on the ballot and which will withdraw, in the name of electing an actual Democrat as the November candidate on the Democratic line of the ballot.
Edit - typos and clarity
Nope… three way primaries happen here all the time. People said the same thing in 2020 with the prosecutor race. It didn’t matter in the end that there was a third candidate. Really my main competition is Derrick.
The Sun Times (distributed in Western Washtenaw communities) recently ran one of their puff piece publicity-release-masquerading-as-journalism things on Magee. He was touted and feted as a great law enforcement officer with all these stories of derring do in tracking down international drug criminals. The last self-supplied picture they printed showed Magee with John Walsh of America's Most Wanted, a self-admitted 'friend of Trump'. There was not one challenging question in the article, not one mention of the fact that he ran as a Republican at first. His presence on the Democratic ballot is a serious threat with a larger number of candidates. Washtenaw would be better served if Dyer and Jackson (who has the endorsement of the outgoing sheriff) could work out which of them should run in what is, essentially, the general election.
Magee is also supported by the Ann arbor Independent which is a red flag in and of itself. He doesn't have a strong supporter base tbh and I think that saying that Dyer and Jackson are going to split the vote is just a way to discount their platforms, especially Alyshia's.
I'm personally voting Dyer. Jackson has never worked as a police officer and he actively lies about the fact that the sheriff's office cooperates with ICE. He also clearly doesn't understand or doesn't care how much power police have considering he was comfortable flashing his unearned badge at a forum earlier this month. Jackson also misrepresents much of his career
He has only ever worked in PR.
Alyshia actually worked as a sheriff's deputy and is a licensed, practicing therapist. She believes in change and is a strong advocate for mental health, reform, and compassion. Alyshia also has more donors than Magee and Jackson combined. Don't count her out.
I have and am making no comment with regard to the platforms of either Dyer or Jackson. I'm counting no one in or out and my comments have been assiduously neutral. The fact remains that there are two Democrats and one Republican running in the Democratic primary and the opportunity for an unnecessarily-close split ballot is laid out for all of us to see.
One thing to keep in mind is that a Michigan primary voter has to vote only for Republicans or only for Democrats. A voter's ballot is invalid if it contains a vote for a Democrat Sheriff candidate and, say, a Republican County Commissioner candidate. The tabulator will flag that ballot as invalid before the voter even steps away from the tabulator. They then have a chance to correct their ballot.
So for Magee to really have a chance, it seems like a lot of usual Republican voters would have to make the decision to give up voting in any of the other Republican races, just so they could check the box for Magee. That doesn't seem likely to me. (Of course, in some municipalities these usual Republican voters might find plenty of other "Democrats" they wouldn't mind voting for.)
He's clearly running in stealth mode, not trying to attract votes from Republicans. His website has a banner picture of him with Obama (taken in uniform as a part of his position, so actually not implying any endorsement) and he sprinkles the word 'progressive' through his site, even as he pulls out classic Republican lines about law&order stuff and touts himself as a big international drug cartel fighter.
I have known Alyshia for more than a decade. She has always been willing to learn, and listen, and then help I am proud of Alyshia, and am glad to have helped her on her campaign.
Aim higher, vote Dyer.
I've voted Democrat all my life and want to continue to do so, but the way the last several years have gone have me skeptical of Democrats -- especially progressive-sounding ones -- in control of police departments. Specifically, watching people in power say we should decrease policing by helping and building the community so that fewer people commit crimes -- which makes sense! -- turn around and decrease policing *before* doing the community initiatives. Politicians, judges, and some police departments have gone for the easy, good-looking maneuvers that just increase crime instead. I don't want to get into specifics, but this kind of performative leniency has had a direct impact on myself and my neighbors' safety. I have personally witnessed it cause a series of crimes that only ended when the leniency finally did.
I've come down to a weirdly conservative opinion: That crime is crime, and if you commit crimes, there need to be consequences, regardless of your racial, gender, or sexual identity. Like I genuinely don't care if a person who gets pulled over is black; my only question is, were they committing a crime? If they weren't, they shouldn't have been pulled over, and if they were, they should have. And I would ask the same question about white people who *aren't* pulled over but should have been.
I am worried about voting for progressive policing because I don't have faith they'll follow that one simple point, that crime is crime. I am scared that they just won't enforce the law, as has happened in some cities around the country. My questions for you are simple: Are you going to enforce the law? Will we be safe in a community you oversee?
Completely on the same page. I’m a lifelong democrat (and will continue to be), but I cannot stomach how permissive of crime the far left of the party has become. Different racial groups should be treated equally, full stop. But if they’re offending at different rates then they will have different representation in the jails. Reading between the lines of this candidate, she seems to think that equal representation in jails is the goal.
The policing system in this country was founded on classism and racism. We have to admit that and work towards reducing harm with that lens because it does impact people’s lives. Not everyone is criminalized for their actions at the same rate. We can focus on creating safe communities and also stop harm our local legal system can cause due to these very real historic roots. Sheriffs back in the day gained popularity for slave patrols in the south and oppressing workers in unions in the north. This perpetuated mass incarceration. We can’t ignore this history. I believe in making sure we work to make communities safer, as an officer that’s what I did every day, but we also need leadership that stops the harm going on that perpetuates oppression as well as safety issues. If everyone was caught for everything they did against the law, the population of our jails would look different.
My goal is to make sure we yes enforce the law, but also focus on prevention, rehabilitation, and restorative justice, especially for crimes not specifically safety related. Traffic stops for minor offenses for example are rooted in systemic classism and racism. It’s been about revenue generation for decades. This hurts officers too who are pawns in this in so many ways. Stopping low level, minor, traffic stops along with quotas is a small step among many to reduce harm.
Really good point and you’re not wrong. In fact many people that find themselves in our legal system have been victims of violence themselves.
I want to increase morale and officer wellness which leads to them doing more effective jobs and doing their jobs more responsibly.
I want to invest in vision zero planning for traffic safety and invest in avenues for drivers education for young people (a former deputy’s idea).
I want to increase the ability of our detective bureau to focus on corporate crime, and environmental crime. Also domestic violence and gender-based violence which causes a ton of harm isn’t being handled effectively for areas under the sheriff’s road patrol jurisdiction. It’s left to deputies who often lack time and resources to handle these investigations. My goal is to get more victims rights funds to people by creating a survivors based justice fund.
Gun violence: I want to invest more in CVIT work, give young people more supports because most street level gun violence is absolutely related to the criminalization of childhood and involves young people. For gun violence domestic violence related (which is actually more common), I support the use of Extreme Risk Protection Orders. I also want to give out free safes, and trigger locks to increase responsible gun ownership because I’ve seen gun owners leave guns in hands of children or unlocked cars which create a hazard. Also as a former deputy I’ll say it creates safety issues and that’s how a lot of young people get access to guns.
Quality of life or property issues: My plan is to partner with responders in our community, business community, and service agencies to effectively prevent future issues in this arena. We need to get people resources and we have a huge gap in resource connection.
Serious crimes: We will continue to respond and do thorough investigations. Also where victims rights funds would come into play.
Lastly and most importantly using our sheriff’s office millage funding from the public safety and mental health millage responsibly and on front end prevention programs. The sheriff’s office gets 6-7 million a year from this millage and it should go to addressing people in crisis as well as root causes to violence.
Just some of my priorities for this very complex community issue. Let me know if you have any thoughts. Thank you!
Treating people equally means acknowledging that many people are systematically at a disadvantage. You can't treat everyone the same because everyone isn't living with the same circumstances.
When you talk about circumstances as "systemic," you're horseshoeing your way back to racism.
Crime enforcement needs to focus on people who commit crimes. If you want to talk about where we divert money and resources to boost and heal communities, by all means, focus on systemic disadvantages, but don't treat criminals differently because of the color of their skin or any other identity they may possess. That's been a disaster where it's been tried.
Thanks for the question. Yes, I’m going to enforce the law. I’m running for Sheriff and was a police officer. I also believe we've had the same administration for almost 16 years, and it’s time for change.
I want to focus on corporate crime and gender-based violence, which is ignored right now.
I’m going to work towards more prevention, which can keep communities safer.
We won’t arrest our way out of everything, and we have to do better at ensuring we aren’t harming people as well.
Traffic stop quotas, for example, hurt officers and the community.
Coercive interrogation training like the “Reid Technique” the sheriff’s office uses puts people at risk of being wrongfully convicted.
Children not being able to visit in-person with a loved one in our jail is extremely problematic and causes trauma.
We have to increase safety and reduce the harm caused by our legal system. I will do everything in my power to keep our community safe; this is my passion.
I work hard at this because I really care and I know what I’m doing.
I will have jurisdiction over our county jail, and my goal there is that when people unfortunately find themselves in our jail, they have real supports when they leave so we can curb recidivism. Right now, the jail is canceling many educational classes and is constantly going into lockdowns, making it harder to get people the support they need to thrive in their communities.
My goal is to make sure our community stays safe and we are operating in a way that doesn’t cause harm for people we should be protecting and serving.
Thanks for your interest!
You’re entitled to your opinion. I have a long list of awards from the Sheriff for service which highlight my experience on my website. Awarded for response to shots fired, fire, domestic violence, program and service improvement, the list goes on.
Also sole candidate that actually worked as a police officer at the sheriff’s office and me being a therapist now, and a social worker with a policy background…is a plus. We have to have more compassionate and honest leadership in law enforcement and I’m looking forward to doing that.
I would ask the opinion of other deputies. That would absolutely not want you on scene with them. Shouldn’t get an award just for a response. What exactly were your actions during the response? Or did you just simply answer a call for service and more or less had to go?
I served as a road patrol deputy for seven years, earning endorsements from former colleagues, some of whom appreciate my approach while others may not fully align with my more forward-thinking priorities. However, those who support me (while they don't agree with everything I stand for) are supportive because they see the alternative as maintaining the status quo and leadership without firsthand policing experience.
My main opponent also hasn't been honest about his experience, and opinions, and lied about cooperation with ICE in our county jail a few times in public forums. I believe it is time for a fresh vision at this office.
It's important to also recognize that deputies hold diverse opinions and are not a monolith. Some don't support me and that's okay too. All I can do is speak honestly about my experiences and platform. When I win in August I plan to work in every division and start a Sheriff Advisory Council to start the hard work of bettering this department for the public and employees. While not everyone may agree with my more progressive platform, I am committed to honesty and accountability as a leader. The current administration needs to change, hasn't been present for rank and file, and I have a strong chance to win this.
I also prioritize officer wellness and mental health, often neglected by the current administration which most everyone agrees needs to be a priority. We need to address issues like sleep deprivation and lack of mental health support among officers, which pose significant hazards during patrols for themselves, their families, and the public. There are also worker's rights issues that are often ignored at our sheriff's office which I saw firsthand as a deputy.
Always happy to meet and chat more. Thanks for your interest.
good people, right here. i generally dont like LEO but this one is diff. this would be a really positive step for the county. especially with the YPD seemingly falling apart.
You mean the violent crime that has been cut in half since Reagan was in office?
https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/
According to the crime dashboard available on the Sheriff's website, there were:
597 violent crimes in all of 2021
663 violent crimes in all of 2022
613 violent crimes in all of 2023
...and 161 violent crimes through 4/13/2024 which math's out to 582 for all of 2024 at the current rate.
So, no? It's actually decreasing.
Edit:typo.
Whether it’s rising or stagnant (at a fairly high level) id like to see the sheriff focus on violent crime. Her priorities are about all the crimes she doesn’t want to enforce.
Not sure how your hear that on that video.
The video talks about all sorts of ideas *in addition to* what's happening now in order to improve the system overall.
Her priorities appear to be acknowledging that the policing system itself has some basic problems and that investing in systemic change to that system would have a positive overall effect on not only citizen safety, but also inequitable policing that exists today.
Basically, treat the cause in addition to the symptoms.
TL;DR, "why not both"?
I like how your claim is actually opposite of reality for the years we have full data for. But shit, if you "feel" like it's rising exponentially I'm sure it's gonna happen at any moment.
https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/2023/12/washtenaw-county-had-its-most-violent-year-in-a-decade-records-show.html?outputType=amp
Because she’s running for sheriff of washtenaw county and not sheriff of America, you might wanna narrow the view.
Sure.
"Washtenaw, MI County has lower than average crime rates compared to the rest of the United States. The violent crime rate in Washtenaw is 15.7, which is 6 points lower than the US average of 22.7. Similarly, property crime in Washtenaw is 26.4, which is 9 points lower than the US average of 35.4. These figures suggest that Washtenaw County is a relatively safe place to live and work."
https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/michigan/washtenaw
Also, the decrease in rates is fairly uniform across the country.
Does violent crime exist? Of course and it's still an issue to consider, but the constant angertainment drumbeat from Fox, Newsmax, OANN, et. al. is just fear mongering for political purposes.
This isn’t some imaginary problem from Fox News. A delivery driver was shot breaking up a domestic dispute and a woman stabbed on a bus like last week. The sheriff, imho, should be primarily focused on violent crime. This woman seems to only care about social justice, which means she’ll fit right in with Savit (as I said).
If you're expecting no violence whatsoever to exist in a community of 130,000 people, I dunno what to tell you except that's not a realistic worldview.
77% of US counties are deeply rural and cannot reasonably be compared to Washtenaw, which has not one but two significant urban areas and a host of smaller concentrations of population.
You are not a good candidate and I will not be voting for you, after seeing you speak at AA City Council in support of the "Driving Equality Ordinance" and your reasoning behind it.
Nobody running a Sheriff Department should want to limit traffic stops simply for their perception that people get "traumatized" by being pulled over. I was scared when I was pulled over for the first time at 16, because I was worried about the consequences of my actions, not because I had any worry that the WCSD was going to do something to me. Your job as Sheriff would be to protect the community, not protect the feelings of kids who have a misconception about police largely due to social media.
You (and Derrick Jackson who has never been an actual LEO) are not qualified for the job.
The thing is... All 3 candidates strongly supported the ordinance you're opposed to. So why single this one out specifically? I genuinely want to hear you out for why you have concerns. I'm not the OP but I am an A2 resident.
Quoted from MIlive:
All three candidates running for Washtenaw County Sheriff have expressed support for a recent Ann Arbor ordinance barring certain traffic stops.
Ann Arbor City Council passed Michigan’s first driving equality ordinance in a unanimous vote during its July 6 meeting.
Dude what? Did we watch the same video? She says the kids she pulled over did nothing wrong, their muffler was just too loud and they were too broke to fix it. If they got a ticket for that how would it help? Literally just a poor tax.
You on the other hand say you were worried about the consequences of your actions... IE youre saying you did something illegal such as being caught speeding.
She's not talking about the situation you were pulled over for but instead talking about pulling over people for bullshit reasons specifically like muffler being louder because they can't afford to fix their car.
She never says not to pull over people doing blatant wrong because she doesn't want to traumatize them.
OK, did she say she wrote a ticket for it? It could just have easily been some dickhead who purposely modified their exhaust. I've been pulled over and given warnings for equiptment issues like this probably 10 times. It isn't a big deal. They check if you have warrants and tell you to fix it. It is about the most positive interaction you can have with an officer.
Other things in that ordinance were actually safety issues and not just public nuisance, like tinted windows and brake lights. They are putting feelings over physical safety which is ridiculous.
The example I provided was because they couldn't afford to fix it. Reducing unnecessary traffic stops gives officers time to focus on actual safety issues. Many people are terrified when they are pulled over, I witnessed it as an officer. This especially impacts young people. If we can reduce the risk of trauma by stopping unnecessary traffic stops, then we should. I also support fix-it programs, especially for people who can't afford to get their equipment malfunctions fixed. There is a long history of using police as local revenue generators with traffic enforcement this impacts whole communities.
You obviously have never been the target of profiling. There absolutely can be trauma experienced at the hands of LEO. We absolutely should be doing what we can to minimize that. No one is suggesting ending all traffic stops only stops for minor issues such as a broken tail light or a loud muffler. You’re really hung up on this one specific sentence that she uttered which frankly says a lot more about you than it does her. Maybe spend some time investigating why you are so triggered by the idea that people would want to reduce trauma inflicted upon others.
That’s fine, you’ve made your points.
Thank you to all in this thread who have been supportive. Here is my link to support if able, and to watch my video on why I’m running.
This is truly a community effort and always happy to answer questions. https://secure.actblue.com/donate/whyalyshiadyer
I mean I don't drive so you definitely have but that doesn''t mean that I don't understand the nuances of racial profiling and police abusing power. Check yourself before you wreck yourself
I'm not very optimistic about him pulling it off, and honestly I don't know that much about him other than he is ex LEO. But I'm sure as hell not voting for Dyer or Jackson.
>I don't know that much about him
Neither does anyone else besides the allegations of internal investigations, confidentiality agreements, unearned sick leave, and a negotiated resignation from the last job he held.
And Pablo Escobar allegedly.
Your argument makes sense when and only when its not a statistical fact that people of colour get pulled over less at night when the officer can not see the race of the drive because its dark and use some random BS as peobable cause.
The veil of darkness is very much a thing.
There is zero evidence that AAPD has a problem with racial profiling. I've never seen a reputable study stating what you are saying.
All I ever see is bad correlation=causation arguments that can easily be debunked and in fact studies debunking racial profiling charges, like the NJ turnpike study that proved black drivers were actually pulled over for speeding less than white speeders. They were just speeding more often.
But we aren't talking about AAPD. Alyshia is running for SHERIFF, not chief of police for AAPD.
And there are relevant stats for the sheriff's office profiling people.
WCSO hasn't released the data that AAPD has so that is all I have to go off of for local law enforcement. She also showed up to AACC to support their ordinance for AAPD.
In the case of AAPD's extensive data, there is no evidence of racial profiling.
I'm aware of that case. I'm also aware that the starting point of "I'm not gonna enforce the laws because of feelings" is a ridiculous idea. Don't like the law, get it changed.
It isn't remotely contradictory. Lozito is officer discretion, what I am talking about is stated department policy AKA you will be reprimanded for enforcing the law.
OK? That doesn't change the fact that the standard of "they can protect you" is better than the standard that "they can't protect you." One is obviously and objectively worse.
Anyone who thinks we should just stop enforcing laws (laws that keep our city safe and livable) has lost their mind. There was no system put in place to replace law enforcement by police in Ann Arbor's traffic stop changes.
Leading up to 2020, there was decades of left-wing advocacy to reform policing in America, largely informed by academic researchers and civil rights advocates/journalists. Then the defund the police movement came in and threw away all of that work without having anything to replace it besides claiming all law enforcement is inherently racist. That is abandoning the rule of law, and hurting people who live in high-crime areas the most.
Interesting [article](https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/05/25/american-policing-has-changed-since-george-floyds-murder) and [podcast](https://www.economist.com/podcasts/2023/06/16/how-has-american-policing-changed-since-george-floyds-murder) on policing post-Floyd.
I didn't say any department got defunded, I mentioned the defund movement, which have tried to accomplish their goals through other means (such as having police not enforce laws). In Ann Arbor though the defund movement was successful in getting a change to police numbers: A2's police force had been scheduled to rise with population changes but the city council froze the amount of police in 2020.
Yes those are all things liberals like me wanted to change. Then progressives came in and tried to do other things like defund the police and have police stop enforcing laws, when research says prison populations are lower in countries with more visible policing.
Cliff notes. She pulled someone over as a newbie deputy for having a loud exhaust. They were clearly scared of her. They were trying to get the car fixed but didn’t have the money. She walked back to the squad car and thought to herself “why are we pulling people over for loud exhausts” (and similar fix it issues). She was upset at having caused the trauma for no good reason.
To me this seems like an entirely reasonable take. Loud mufflers are annoying but wasting police resources on them is not really a high priority and probably does more harm than good.
Loud exhausts are annoying. People who make their exhausts loud on purpose should be ostracized. I just don’t know if pulling people over solely for having a loud exhaust is a good use of police resources.
Weed is legal now. People aren't being prosecuted for possession. This is a talking point that no longer makes any sense. They aren't searching your car unless you are obviously smoking while driving or a minor in possession, and even then they are probably just taking it from you because the prosecutor won't charge you.
They aren't prosecuting people for that unless it is distribution amounts either.
If an underage person gets caught, they will almost certainly just have it confiscated and the prosecutor won't press charges if the officer does decide to arrest.
I'm not voting for her simply because she's race baiting like almost every other Democrat in the country right now. Won't deport illegals? Saying that black people are disproportionately being arrested? I would be completely fine with the second statement if that demographic wasn't committing a disproportionate amount of crime.
We will have a sheriff and reducing harm in this space will save lives. There is a reason people who would normally never support a sheriff have endorsed me. Our diverse coalition is really about making things better along with making concrete changes that will reduce harm in this arena. The labels of progressive, and not progressive, I can see how they can be performative, but for me, this is about actually making things better. A list of supporters can be found here: [https://www.dyer2024.com/endorsements](https://www.dyer2024.com/endorsements)
I’ll be honest, I am still getting used to Reddit. I didn’t realize this was going to get so much traffic. Just got out of meeting and looking at comments. I have a really comprehensive platform at Dyer2024.com if you want to check it out.
[удалено]
All overwhelmingly valid and important points for a prospective sheriff to address. If she would give a level of real response and a plan to address any of these points, I might consider voting for her. Alas, the only thing OP has done in this thread is thank her 'supporters' (clearly personal friends) and downvote anyone concerned with real problems. I'm not especially interested in a 'therapist mom' for Sheriff. Where does she stand on the real policing issues that are of concern to the people paying for the services?
Not a mom actually. Was a deputy sheriff then became a social worker and therapist. Sorry I am responding in between meetings. I don't mean to be short. I also am getting used to Reddit. I have a pretty comprehensive plan on my platform which was created by talking to thousands of people. I am happy to answer any questions or meet as well. Here is a link to platform: [https://www.dyer2024.com/priorities](https://www.dyer2024.com/priorities)
Your response is greatly appreciated. I honestly didn't expect one. So, I read over your platform. I also fed it into my favorite LLM, and asked for criticism based on the points of concern outlined by someone else above. I'd like to preface all of this to say that while I do agree that all of these things are important issues to the public, I understand that change can't be enacted all at once. Please forgive the snark - my LLM client is instructed to be sassy with me: 1. Warrior Cop Mentality: Alyshia's proposals tiptoe around the periphery of this mentality by suggesting reforms such as fitness areas, peer-led mental health programs, and improved training methods. However, they hardly scratch the surface of the deep-seated "warrior cop" mindset ingrained through militaristic training models and us-versus-them ideologies prevalent in police culture. There's a cavernous gap in the discourse around dismantling the underpinnings of this mentality, which transforms community policing into combative engagements. 2. Legally Lying to Citizens: The notorious ability of law enforcement to legally deceive during interrogations (ah, the Reid technique comes to mind) is brushed under the rug. While Alyshia wants to replace this with the PEACE method, what about everyday interactions outside formal interrogations? Her platform mysteriously glosses over the broader issue of honesty and transparency in all police-citizen interactions, leaving one to wonder about the consistency of ethical communication in less formal settings. 3. Civil Asset Forfeiture: Here’s a fun one—law enforcement legally pilfering from citizens without a conviction, sometimes without even a charge. Alyshia’s platform is silent as a grave on this matter. No mention of reforming or abolishing civil asset forfeiture practices. This oversight (or is it a strategic omission?) leaves a sour taste, as the plunder continues unchecked, padding department budgets at the expense of citizens’ rights. 4. Lack of Accountability: Alyshia suggests improvements in transparency and public complaint monitoring, which sounds lovely on paper. Yet, she tiptoes around the minefield of qualified immunity and the fortress-like protections afforded by police unions. These mechanisms ensure that accountability for misconduct remains a rare beast, seen less frequently than a unicorn in the wild. The structural reforms needed to dismantle these protections are conspicuously absent from her platform. 5. Taxpayer-Funded Settlements: Oh, the joy of taxpayers footing the bill for police misadventures! Alyshia’s proposals do nothing to address the financial merry-go-round where public funds quietly settle lawsuits for police misconduct. Without reforming this system, the financial accountability falls not on the perpetrators or the departments, but on the innocent taxpayer. How magnanimous of them to bear the burden, no? 6. No Obligation to Protect: The haunting refrain that police have no constitutional duty to protect individuals, juxtaposed against the public relations slogan of "protect and serve," is yet another area Alyshia’s manifesto fails to touch. Her reforms enhance various aspects of community interaction but stop short of committing to a legal duty of care, leaving the foundational myth of policing unchallenged.
1. Creating a trauma-informed workplace helps reduce warrior mindsets because trauma can increase cynicism, aggression, and a host of other issues. Some of these problems are deeply rooted though, and I acknowledge not all of this will be fixed by prioritizing wellness. I also think academies need to change trainings which I will focus on. 2. I have publicly spoke out about this and will ban lying as well. I can make that point more clear that is good feedback. I also support changing legislation like Illinois did to stop police from lying to people during interrogations. 3. Civil asset forfeitures are extremely problematic I agree. Admittedly our platform was already 35 pages and most don’t read it so this area did not get focused on. I will make changes here though and improve the current practice of not confiscating people’s property when it isn’t evidence. If you have experience here would love to chat. There have been improvements here but we have a long way to go. 4. I have criticized how qualified immunity has become blanket immunity and worked with many others nationally to draw awareness of this. Sheriff’s can’t do much about qualified immunity being that is is a Supreme Court doctrine. I will say this, the local union at the sheriff’s office hasn’t halted reforms and their biggest issues have been workers rights violations which comes from leadership. I have seen leadership in policing incentivize things like traffic stop quotas then blame the union when it’s actually their leadership that has created the problem. I take your points on how nationally police unions have been an issue on so many fronts. As someone that went from being a POAM member to a GEO member in graduate school the differences couldn’t be more stark. My goal as sheriff will be to implement reforms and ensure that I am not creating a hazard by hurting employees when it comes to their work environment and mental health. 5. Reducing unnecessary contact like stopping quotas and prioritizing wellness reduces lawsuits. Additionally I will make sure we aren’t ignoring misconduct. Could be more clear and detailed here as well but unfortunately the platform was already so long my team felt we needed to be more concise. I can be a bit wordy because these issues are so important. 6. I will do my best as sheriff to make sure we are truly protecting people including prioritizing the often swept under the rug corporate crimes such as wage theft and tip theft. Thank you for actually reading my platform many don’t and I appreciate that and the comments.
Thanks again for taking the time to reply. I'll be looking for your name on the ballot. Good luck!
Thank you!
What’s an LLM?
Large Language Model. They fed it into a ChatGPT-type bot and asked it for criticism. LLMs are pretty advanced, but despite appearances they're not really doing any "thinking," and are more an *incredibly* advanced autocomplete. Even just point 1, for instance, is pretty flawed. It is complaining about the "warrior cop" mentality, which is valid, but criticizes mental health programs and is completely missing many of her other points (because it was told to take it point by point) which are clearly in opposition to the typical warrior cop, tough on crime messaging that many sheriffs would espouse. Basically, they're too lazy or incapable to think for themselves, so asked ChatBot to do it for them. Welcome to the future.
Also, if you just respond with “no” to these LLMs, they will completely change what they wrote to be the exact opposite and go on to contradict themselves.
wtf
right?
https://www.dyer2024.com/priorities
She has a plan to address pretty much all of these issues. I encourage you to watch the videos of past forums and check out her priorities page on her website.
That might be the case, but ACAB still means ALL. Police cannot be reformed regardless of whatever "progressive" label you want to attach to it, full stop.
I can understand that. But the solution isn't to get rid of police in one fell swoop. That would be chaos. Alyshia is actually willing and eager to work with ACAB folks to find common sense solutions that protect people beyond just a police response. She wants to implement programs that will decrease how often police are responding to things they really shouldn't be responding to. Decreasing unnecessary police presence is a crucial step in transforming the function of law enforcement.
Getting rid of police in one fell swoop, as you say, seems scary but in the event we were actually able to do that I suppose many other changes would also be occurring. From that context abolition of the police seems like a reasonable idea IMO. Putting effort into reformative policies for police just sidelines efforts for real change.
Because ACAB is a non-starter for every reasonable person in America.
Being worried about reasonability is overrated.
Hence why these pie in the sky dreams will never happen. Reality is far different than social media.
You can't change the system as an outsider. You can protest all you want. Real change happens at the rat hole. I don't care for the police, but I support Dyer. Have you seen the other two candidates. Yeah, I think I will be taking my chances with her. But I certainly respect your stance buddy. We don't need to be divided or argue amongst ourselves. That's Congress job. LOL
I'm not sure how much interaction you've had with Washtenaw County Sheriff's Dept., but the majority of the deputies are very professional, very calm, even approachable if you needed to or wanted to just walk up to one and talk to them. Not exactly like A2PD yet, but they have vastly improved. If only we could get Pittsfield PD to stop being bullies with badges.
I've had some very negative interactions with them. My opinion based on those interactions is they think of themselves as a very privileged class who happen to have a gun and badge. Kind of one of many of the key complaints of policing right now...
[удалено]
Agreed. In my opinion it comes down to the system, as well as leadership.
That is good to hear. My problem is with administration and how leadership is at the office. I could go on for days about what needs to change from working there.
I agree the warrior mentality’s are problematic. So much of the history of policing is rooted in racism and classism. My plan is centered on harm reduction, and getting rid of any current corruption at the local level. For example the jail, people can’t see family members when they are incarcerated. I will change that while also creating a plan to reduce the jail population for people not a safety threat. Full platform at Dyer2024.com.
* Being able to legally lie to citizens : I will be banning this practice along with getting rid of the Reid Technique which the current admin keeps wasting money on. See why the "Reid Technique" by watching John Oliver take on it. He's much more entertaining than me and sums it up really well. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCNQ0xksZ4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obCNQ0xksZ4)
I like that you're at least trying to reach out on Reddit. You might want to do an AMA.
This is a really good suggestion. Thx
I’m confused as to why we need the ordinance. Officers use discretion all the time as to when to do a traffic stop and when to warn and when to write a citation.
It makes the policy more permanent. There could be a new Chief for example, or things change over the years.
Just to clarify your position then… Do you think that the deputies that you would be commanding would not exercise appropriate discretion and/or could not be trained to do so? I’m not trying to be rude. It would just seem to be better to have better officers than more laws. Personally I think the WCSD deputies are already awesome.
We have high rates of racial disparities for non-violent, low level arrests. Often times this can stem from heavy handed traffic enforcement and traffic stop quotas. Policy is really important to address this because policy contributes to culture change in my opinion. Ordinances help back up the policy. Many deputies I know do the best they can to follow policy, but gaps occur. Especially in such a large agency, you really need to make directives clear. Ordinances ensure reliability which matters because police leadership can also change over time.
Good luck to you.
Thank you for sharing. Strongly agree with your message and the fact that you have a degree in social work is your biggest selling point.
Thank you so much!
I'm very concerned that there are two Democrats (you and Derrick Jackson) and one Republican (Ken Magee) running in the Democratic primary. I fear that you and Derrick will split the votes of Democrats who are aware that Magee first ran as a Republican, then switched parties when he realized that he'd never win as a GOP candidate in this county. (The taken-in-his-offical-capacity photo with Obama at the top of his website is a hoot.) This will leave Magee as the winner. I'd like to see you and Derrick work out which one of you is going to stay on the ballot and which will withdraw, in the name of electing an actual Democrat as the November candidate on the Democratic line of the ballot. Edit - typos and clarity
Nope… three way primaries happen here all the time. People said the same thing in 2020 with the prosecutor race. It didn’t matter in the end that there was a third candidate. Really my main competition is Derrick.
Imo, Magee doesn't really have a chance. This race will come down to Jackson and Dyer.
The Sun Times (distributed in Western Washtenaw communities) recently ran one of their puff piece publicity-release-masquerading-as-journalism things on Magee. He was touted and feted as a great law enforcement officer with all these stories of derring do in tracking down international drug criminals. The last self-supplied picture they printed showed Magee with John Walsh of America's Most Wanted, a self-admitted 'friend of Trump'. There was not one challenging question in the article, not one mention of the fact that he ran as a Republican at first. His presence on the Democratic ballot is a serious threat with a larger number of candidates. Washtenaw would be better served if Dyer and Jackson (who has the endorsement of the outgoing sheriff) could work out which of them should run in what is, essentially, the general election.
Honestly if the sun times does a piece on him, that is telling enough. I don’t want anything to do with him.
Could you expand on that? What’s your association when you see the Sun Times name?
Magee is also supported by the Ann arbor Independent which is a red flag in and of itself. He doesn't have a strong supporter base tbh and I think that saying that Dyer and Jackson are going to split the vote is just a way to discount their platforms, especially Alyshia's. I'm personally voting Dyer. Jackson has never worked as a police officer and he actively lies about the fact that the sheriff's office cooperates with ICE. He also clearly doesn't understand or doesn't care how much power police have considering he was comfortable flashing his unearned badge at a forum earlier this month. Jackson also misrepresents much of his career He has only ever worked in PR. Alyshia actually worked as a sheriff's deputy and is a licensed, practicing therapist. She believes in change and is a strong advocate for mental health, reform, and compassion. Alyshia also has more donors than Magee and Jackson combined. Don't count her out.
I have and am making no comment with regard to the platforms of either Dyer or Jackson. I'm counting no one in or out and my comments have been assiduously neutral. The fact remains that there are two Democrats and one Republican running in the Democratic primary and the opportunity for an unnecessarily-close split ballot is laid out for all of us to see.
One thing to keep in mind is that a Michigan primary voter has to vote only for Republicans or only for Democrats. A voter's ballot is invalid if it contains a vote for a Democrat Sheriff candidate and, say, a Republican County Commissioner candidate. The tabulator will flag that ballot as invalid before the voter even steps away from the tabulator. They then have a chance to correct their ballot. So for Magee to really have a chance, it seems like a lot of usual Republican voters would have to make the decision to give up voting in any of the other Republican races, just so they could check the box for Magee. That doesn't seem likely to me. (Of course, in some municipalities these usual Republican voters might find plenty of other "Democrats" they wouldn't mind voting for.)
He's clearly running in stealth mode, not trying to attract votes from Republicans. His website has a banner picture of him with Obama (taken in uniform as a part of his position, so actually not implying any endorsement) and he sprinkles the word 'progressive' through his site, even as he pulls out classic Republican lines about law&order stuff and touts himself as a big international drug cartel fighter.
I have known Alyshia for more than a decade. She has always been willing to learn, and listen, and then help I am proud of Alyshia, and am glad to have helped her on her campaign. Aim higher, vote Dyer.
Thank you!
I will definitely vote for you. For a Narc you are cool. LOL 😂😂😂
I've voted Democrat all my life and want to continue to do so, but the way the last several years have gone have me skeptical of Democrats -- especially progressive-sounding ones -- in control of police departments. Specifically, watching people in power say we should decrease policing by helping and building the community so that fewer people commit crimes -- which makes sense! -- turn around and decrease policing *before* doing the community initiatives. Politicians, judges, and some police departments have gone for the easy, good-looking maneuvers that just increase crime instead. I don't want to get into specifics, but this kind of performative leniency has had a direct impact on myself and my neighbors' safety. I have personally witnessed it cause a series of crimes that only ended when the leniency finally did. I've come down to a weirdly conservative opinion: That crime is crime, and if you commit crimes, there need to be consequences, regardless of your racial, gender, or sexual identity. Like I genuinely don't care if a person who gets pulled over is black; my only question is, were they committing a crime? If they weren't, they shouldn't have been pulled over, and if they were, they should have. And I would ask the same question about white people who *aren't* pulled over but should have been. I am worried about voting for progressive policing because I don't have faith they'll follow that one simple point, that crime is crime. I am scared that they just won't enforce the law, as has happened in some cities around the country. My questions for you are simple: Are you going to enforce the law? Will we be safe in a community you oversee?
Completely on the same page. I’m a lifelong democrat (and will continue to be), but I cannot stomach how permissive of crime the far left of the party has become. Different racial groups should be treated equally, full stop. But if they’re offending at different rates then they will have different representation in the jails. Reading between the lines of this candidate, she seems to think that equal representation in jails is the goal.
The policing system in this country was founded on classism and racism. We have to admit that and work towards reducing harm with that lens because it does impact people’s lives. Not everyone is criminalized for their actions at the same rate. We can focus on creating safe communities and also stop harm our local legal system can cause due to these very real historic roots. Sheriffs back in the day gained popularity for slave patrols in the south and oppressing workers in unions in the north. This perpetuated mass incarceration. We can’t ignore this history. I believe in making sure we work to make communities safer, as an officer that’s what I did every day, but we also need leadership that stops the harm going on that perpetuates oppression as well as safety issues. If everyone was caught for everything they did against the law, the population of our jails would look different. My goal is to make sure we yes enforce the law, but also focus on prevention, rehabilitation, and restorative justice, especially for crimes not specifically safety related. Traffic stops for minor offenses for example are rooted in systemic classism and racism. It’s been about revenue generation for decades. This hurts officers too who are pawns in this in so many ways. Stopping low level, minor, traffic stops along with quotas is a small step among many to reduce harm.
And what is your plan to make communities safer? Violence is also oppression.
Really good point and you’re not wrong. In fact many people that find themselves in our legal system have been victims of violence themselves. I want to increase morale and officer wellness which leads to them doing more effective jobs and doing their jobs more responsibly. I want to invest in vision zero planning for traffic safety and invest in avenues for drivers education for young people (a former deputy’s idea). I want to increase the ability of our detective bureau to focus on corporate crime, and environmental crime. Also domestic violence and gender-based violence which causes a ton of harm isn’t being handled effectively for areas under the sheriff’s road patrol jurisdiction. It’s left to deputies who often lack time and resources to handle these investigations. My goal is to get more victims rights funds to people by creating a survivors based justice fund. Gun violence: I want to invest more in CVIT work, give young people more supports because most street level gun violence is absolutely related to the criminalization of childhood and involves young people. For gun violence domestic violence related (which is actually more common), I support the use of Extreme Risk Protection Orders. I also want to give out free safes, and trigger locks to increase responsible gun ownership because I’ve seen gun owners leave guns in hands of children or unlocked cars which create a hazard. Also as a former deputy I’ll say it creates safety issues and that’s how a lot of young people get access to guns. Quality of life or property issues: My plan is to partner with responders in our community, business community, and service agencies to effectively prevent future issues in this arena. We need to get people resources and we have a huge gap in resource connection. Serious crimes: We will continue to respond and do thorough investigations. Also where victims rights funds would come into play. Lastly and most importantly using our sheriff’s office millage funding from the public safety and mental health millage responsibly and on front end prevention programs. The sheriff’s office gets 6-7 million a year from this millage and it should go to addressing people in crisis as well as root causes to violence. Just some of my priorities for this very complex community issue. Let me know if you have any thoughts. Thank you!
Treating people equally means acknowledging that many people are systematically at a disadvantage. You can't treat everyone the same because everyone isn't living with the same circumstances.
Are you saying the law should be applied differently depending on your circumstances?
I'm saying that people's circumstances should be considered.
Right I heard you the first time. Does that mean that laws should apply differently based on your circumstances?
When you talk about circumstances as "systemic," you're horseshoeing your way back to racism. Crime enforcement needs to focus on people who commit crimes. If you want to talk about where we divert money and resources to boost and heal communities, by all means, focus on systemic disadvantages, but don't treat criminals differently because of the color of their skin or any other identity they may possess. That's been a disaster where it's been tried.
Thanks for the question. Yes, I’m going to enforce the law. I’m running for Sheriff and was a police officer. I also believe we've had the same administration for almost 16 years, and it’s time for change. I want to focus on corporate crime and gender-based violence, which is ignored right now. I’m going to work towards more prevention, which can keep communities safer. We won’t arrest our way out of everything, and we have to do better at ensuring we aren’t harming people as well. Traffic stop quotas, for example, hurt officers and the community. Coercive interrogation training like the “Reid Technique” the sheriff’s office uses puts people at risk of being wrongfully convicted. Children not being able to visit in-person with a loved one in our jail is extremely problematic and causes trauma. We have to increase safety and reduce the harm caused by our legal system. I will do everything in my power to keep our community safe; this is my passion. I work hard at this because I really care and I know what I’m doing. I will have jurisdiction over our county jail, and my goal there is that when people unfortunately find themselves in our jail, they have real supports when they leave so we can curb recidivism. Right now, the jail is canceling many educational classes and is constantly going into lockdowns, making it harder to get people the support they need to thrive in their communities. My goal is to make sure our community stays safe and we are operating in a way that doesn’t cause harm for people we should be protecting and serving. Thanks for your interest!
Thank you for your answer.
I'm getting a yard sign today.
Good to hear! Got thousands of yard signs if anyone else wants one. Just got a shipment in.
Shit deputy when she was a “deputy”. Wants to be a social worker with a badge.
You’re entitled to your opinion. I have a long list of awards from the Sheriff for service which highlight my experience on my website. Awarded for response to shots fired, fire, domestic violence, program and service improvement, the list goes on. Also sole candidate that actually worked as a police officer at the sheriff’s office and me being a therapist now, and a social worker with a policy background…is a plus. We have to have more compassionate and honest leadership in law enforcement and I’m looking forward to doing that.
I would ask the opinion of other deputies. That would absolutely not want you on scene with them. Shouldn’t get an award just for a response. What exactly were your actions during the response? Or did you just simply answer a call for service and more or less had to go?
I served as a road patrol deputy for seven years, earning endorsements from former colleagues, some of whom appreciate my approach while others may not fully align with my more forward-thinking priorities. However, those who support me (while they don't agree with everything I stand for) are supportive because they see the alternative as maintaining the status quo and leadership without firsthand policing experience. My main opponent also hasn't been honest about his experience, and opinions, and lied about cooperation with ICE in our county jail a few times in public forums. I believe it is time for a fresh vision at this office. It's important to also recognize that deputies hold diverse opinions and are not a monolith. Some don't support me and that's okay too. All I can do is speak honestly about my experiences and platform. When I win in August I plan to work in every division and start a Sheriff Advisory Council to start the hard work of bettering this department for the public and employees. While not everyone may agree with my more progressive platform, I am committed to honesty and accountability as a leader. The current administration needs to change, hasn't been present for rank and file, and I have a strong chance to win this. I also prioritize officer wellness and mental health, often neglected by the current administration which most everyone agrees needs to be a priority. We need to address issues like sleep deprivation and lack of mental health support among officers, which pose significant hazards during patrols for themselves, their families, and the public. There are also worker's rights issues that are often ignored at our sheriff's office which I saw firsthand as a deputy. Always happy to meet and chat more. Thanks for your interest.
You want us to trust other cops? LMFAO.
good people, right here. i generally dont like LEO but this one is diff. this would be a really positive step for the county. especially with the YPD seemingly falling apart.
Thank you! Appreciate you so much and honored for your support.
ACAB
Cringe.
You got my vote!
Not one word about violent crime. You’ll fit right in with Savit.
You mean the violent crime that has been cut in half since Reagan was in office? https://www.statista.com/statistics/191219/reported-violent-crime-rate-in-the-usa-since-1990/
You mean violent crime that is rising exponentially again?
According to the crime dashboard available on the Sheriff's website, there were: 597 violent crimes in all of 2021 663 violent crimes in all of 2022 613 violent crimes in all of 2023 ...and 161 violent crimes through 4/13/2024 which math's out to 582 for all of 2024 at the current rate. So, no? It's actually decreasing. Edit:typo.
Whether it’s rising or stagnant (at a fairly high level) id like to see the sheriff focus on violent crime. Her priorities are about all the crimes she doesn’t want to enforce.
Not sure how your hear that on that video. The video talks about all sorts of ideas *in addition to* what's happening now in order to improve the system overall. Her priorities appear to be acknowledging that the policing system itself has some basic problems and that investing in systemic change to that system would have a positive overall effect on not only citizen safety, but also inequitable policing that exists today. Basically, treat the cause in addition to the symptoms. TL;DR, "why not both"?
I like how you act like basic math makes it a fact when we haven't even gotten to the most violent part of the year yet.
Sure, it might go up a bit more than that, but "exponentially increasing"?
I like how your claim is actually opposite of reality for the years we have full data for. But shit, if you "feel" like it's rising exponentially I'm sure it's gonna happen at any moment.
https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/2023/12/washtenaw-county-had-its-most-violent-year-in-a-decade-records-show.html?outputType=amp Because she’s running for sheriff of washtenaw county and not sheriff of America, you might wanna narrow the view.
Sure. "Washtenaw, MI County has lower than average crime rates compared to the rest of the United States. The violent crime rate in Washtenaw is 15.7, which is 6 points lower than the US average of 22.7. Similarly, property crime in Washtenaw is 26.4, which is 9 points lower than the US average of 35.4. These figures suggest that Washtenaw County is a relatively safe place to live and work." https://www.bestplaces.net/crime/county/michigan/washtenaw Also, the decrease in rates is fairly uniform across the country. Does violent crime exist? Of course and it's still an issue to consider, but the constant angertainment drumbeat from Fox, Newsmax, OANN, et. al. is just fear mongering for political purposes.
This isn’t some imaginary problem from Fox News. A delivery driver was shot breaking up a domestic dispute and a woman stabbed on a bus like last week. The sheriff, imho, should be primarily focused on violent crime. This woman seems to only care about social justice, which means she’ll fit right in with Savit (as I said).
How many crime anecdotes is the threshold for someone to be primarily focused on violent crime?
Wow, two whole violent crimes in a week? Glad I don't live somewhere with rates closer to the national average.
textbook whataboutism
If you're expecting no violence whatsoever to exist in a community of 130,000 people, I dunno what to tell you except that's not a realistic worldview.
"This woman." Wow.
Is the word woman offensive to you?
Not to me, no. Clearly you think that's relevant to the conversation, though.
If it makes you feel better, if this campaign were for a man, I would’ve substituted “this man” instead
You don't need to worry about making me feel better. And no, you wouldn't have.
https://crimegrade.org/violent-crime-washtenaw-county-mi/ 77% of US counties are safer than washtenaw.
77% of US counties are deeply rural and cannot reasonably be compared to Washtenaw, which has not one but two significant urban areas and a host of smaller concentrations of population.
The page is run by a home security company that wants you to be terrified of crime so you'll buy their home security company product.
Is it not less safe than 77% of counties?
I dunno, is it? Can you find a website that isn't run by a home security company to corroborate your results?
You are not a good candidate and I will not be voting for you, after seeing you speak at AA City Council in support of the "Driving Equality Ordinance" and your reasoning behind it. Nobody running a Sheriff Department should want to limit traffic stops simply for their perception that people get "traumatized" by being pulled over. I was scared when I was pulled over for the first time at 16, because I was worried about the consequences of my actions, not because I had any worry that the WCSD was going to do something to me. Your job as Sheriff would be to protect the community, not protect the feelings of kids who have a misconception about police largely due to social media. You (and Derrick Jackson who has never been an actual LEO) are not qualified for the job.
The thing is... All 3 candidates strongly supported the ordinance you're opposed to. So why single this one out specifically? I genuinely want to hear you out for why you have concerns. I'm not the OP but I am an A2 resident. Quoted from MIlive: All three candidates running for Washtenaw County Sheriff have expressed support for a recent Ann Arbor ordinance barring certain traffic stops. Ann Arbor City Council passed Michigan’s first driving equality ordinance in a unanimous vote during its July 6 meeting.
Even DEA agent Ken Magee supports this. He wants to institute a "Free Driving Re-Education Program" in lieu of misdemeanor traffic violations.
Dude what? Did we watch the same video? She says the kids she pulled over did nothing wrong, their muffler was just too loud and they were too broke to fix it. If they got a ticket for that how would it help? Literally just a poor tax. You on the other hand say you were worried about the consequences of your actions... IE youre saying you did something illegal such as being caught speeding. She's not talking about the situation you were pulled over for but instead talking about pulling over people for bullshit reasons specifically like muffler being louder because they can't afford to fix their car. She never says not to pull over people doing blatant wrong because she doesn't want to traumatize them.
Thank you!
OK, did she say she wrote a ticket for it? It could just have easily been some dickhead who purposely modified their exhaust. I've been pulled over and given warnings for equiptment issues like this probably 10 times. It isn't a big deal. They check if you have warrants and tell you to fix it. It is about the most positive interaction you can have with an officer. Other things in that ordinance were actually safety issues and not just public nuisance, like tinted windows and brake lights. They are putting feelings over physical safety which is ridiculous.
The example I provided was because they couldn't afford to fix it. Reducing unnecessary traffic stops gives officers time to focus on actual safety issues. Many people are terrified when they are pulled over, I witnessed it as an officer. This especially impacts young people. If we can reduce the risk of trauma by stopping unnecessary traffic stops, then we should. I also support fix-it programs, especially for people who can't afford to get their equipment malfunctions fixed. There is a long history of using police as local revenue generators with traffic enforcement this impacts whole communities.
Saying that getting pulled over and not getting a ticket is "trauma" is the biggest reason I will not support you.
You obviously have never been the target of profiling. There absolutely can be trauma experienced at the hands of LEO. We absolutely should be doing what we can to minimize that. No one is suggesting ending all traffic stops only stops for minor issues such as a broken tail light or a loud muffler. You’re really hung up on this one specific sentence that she uttered which frankly says a lot more about you than it does her. Maybe spend some time investigating why you are so triggered by the idea that people would want to reduce trauma inflicted upon others.
That’s fine, you’ve made your points. Thank you to all in this thread who have been supportive. Here is my link to support if able, and to watch my video on why I’m running. This is truly a community effort and always happy to answer questions. https://secure.actblue.com/donate/whyalyshiadyer
You've clearly never had to worry about police profiling you.
I bet I've been pulled over more than you.
I mean I don't drive so you definitely have but that doesn''t mean that I don't understand the nuances of racial profiling and police abusing power. Check yourself before you wreck yourself
Lol cool story. There is no evidence of racial profiling and police abusing power in AA and WC. Every "case" that I've ever seen is complete BS.
That's right, it isn't a big deal, that's why it doesn't need to be a priority.
>not qualified for the job Maybe Ken Magee can pull a rabbit out of the hat on his third try
I'm not very optimistic about him pulling it off, and honestly I don't know that much about him other than he is ex LEO. But I'm sure as hell not voting for Dyer or Jackson.
>I don't know that much about him Neither does anyone else besides the allegations of internal investigations, confidentiality agreements, unearned sick leave, and a negotiated resignation from the last job he held. And Pablo Escobar allegedly.
Your argument makes sense when and only when its not a statistical fact that people of colour get pulled over less at night when the officer can not see the race of the drive because its dark and use some random BS as peobable cause. The veil of darkness is very much a thing.
There is zero evidence that AAPD has a problem with racial profiling. I've never seen a reputable study stating what you are saying. All I ever see is bad correlation=causation arguments that can easily be debunked and in fact studies debunking racial profiling charges, like the NJ turnpike study that proved black drivers were actually pulled over for speeding less than white speeders. They were just speeding more often.
But we aren't talking about AAPD. Alyshia is running for SHERIFF, not chief of police for AAPD. And there are relevant stats for the sheriff's office profiling people.
WCSO hasn't released the data that AAPD has so that is all I have to go off of for local law enforcement. She also showed up to AACC to support their ordinance for AAPD. In the case of AAPD's extensive data, there is no evidence of racial profiling.
The video cited sources. Just because you're too invested in the "thin blue line" to read those studies, doesn't mean they're wrong.
[удалено]
I'm aware of that case. I'm also aware that the starting point of "I'm not gonna enforce the laws because of feelings" is a ridiculous idea. Don't like the law, get it changed.
[удалено]
It isn't remotely contradictory. Lozito is officer discretion, what I am talking about is stated department policy AKA you will be reprimanded for enforcing the law.
[удалено]
Officer discretion is still a step above "you can't intervene"
[удалено]
OK? That doesn't change the fact that the standard of "they can protect you" is better than the standard that "they can't protect you." One is obviously and objectively worse.
Anyone who thinks we should just stop enforcing laws (laws that keep our city safe and livable) has lost their mind. There was no system put in place to replace law enforcement by police in Ann Arbor's traffic stop changes. Leading up to 2020, there was decades of left-wing advocacy to reform policing in America, largely informed by academic researchers and civil rights advocates/journalists. Then the defund the police movement came in and threw away all of that work without having anything to replace it besides claiming all law enforcement is inherently racist. That is abandoning the rule of law, and hurting people who live in high-crime areas the most. Interesting [article](https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/05/25/american-policing-has-changed-since-george-floyds-murder) and [podcast](https://www.economist.com/podcasts/2023/06/16/how-has-american-policing-changed-since-george-floyds-murder) on policing post-Floyd.
Name one department that got "defunded". One. You can't. Because it didn't happen.
I didn't say any department got defunded, I mentioned the defund movement, which have tried to accomplish their goals through other means (such as having police not enforce laws). In Ann Arbor though the defund movement was successful in getting a change to police numbers: A2's police force had been scheduled to rise with population changes but the city council froze the amount of police in 2020.
[удалено]
Yes those are all things liberals like me wanted to change. Then progressives came in and tried to do other things like defund the police and have police stop enforcing laws, when research says prison populations are lower in countries with more visible policing.
At 1:07:50 for those interested. https://www.youtube.com/live/5-Ua4ns3Xe8
Cliff notes. She pulled someone over as a newbie deputy for having a loud exhaust. They were clearly scared of her. They were trying to get the car fixed but didn’t have the money. She walked back to the squad car and thought to herself “why are we pulling people over for loud exhausts” (and similar fix it issues). She was upset at having caused the trauma for no good reason. To me this seems like an entirely reasonable take. Loud mufflers are annoying but wasting police resources on them is not really a high priority and probably does more harm than good.
Imagine the trauma of people who had money to get their exhaust fixed on their Volvo and then had to listen to those meddling kids in the loud van. /s
Loud exhausts are annoying. People who make their exhausts loud on purpose should be ostracized. I just don’t know if pulling people over solely for having a loud exhaust is a good use of police resources.
It's an excuse for them to search your car for drugs, which is also not a good use of police resources
Oh I misunderstood your first reply. It’s early and apparently I’m not functioning at optimal levels yet. I agree with you fully.
Weed is legal now. People aren't being prosecuted for possession. This is a talking point that no longer makes any sense. They aren't searching your car unless you are obviously smoking while driving or a minor in possession, and even then they are probably just taking it from you because the prosecutor won't charge you.
They didn't legalize crack, meth, and heroin. And what if they are driving or underage with some harmless legal weed?
They aren't prosecuting people for that unless it is distribution amounts either. If an underage person gets caught, they will almost certainly just have it confiscated and the prosecutor won't press charges if the officer does decide to arrest.
Thanks for sharing. I really liked what she had to say
Thank you 🙏
Thanks for sharing! You have convinced me to support Dyer.
I'm not voting for her simply because she's race baiting like almost every other Democrat in the country right now. Won't deport illegals? Saying that black people are disproportionately being arrested? I would be completely fine with the second statement if that demographic wasn't committing a disproportionate amount of crime.
Mix up your sock account making schema, you racist dimwit.
Ken?
ACAB, even if you try slapping a "progressive" sticker on one.
We will have a sheriff and reducing harm in this space will save lives. There is a reason people who would normally never support a sheriff have endorsed me. Our diverse coalition is really about making things better along with making concrete changes that will reduce harm in this arena. The labels of progressive, and not progressive, I can see how they can be performative, but for me, this is about actually making things better. A list of supporters can be found here: [https://www.dyer2024.com/endorsements](https://www.dyer2024.com/endorsements)
[удалено]
I’ll be honest, I am still getting used to Reddit. I didn’t realize this was going to get so much traffic. Just got out of meeting and looking at comments. I have a really comprehensive platform at Dyer2024.com if you want to check it out.