Public safety officials criticized for not releasing state data on racial profiling in traffic stops

The Executive Office of Public Safety hasn’t issued required reports analyzing racial profiling in traffic stops since 2024.

Before lawmakers passed a 2019 law banning motorists from using handheld electronic devices, there were months of controversial negotiations and calls by the NAACP and ACLU about how best to include language ensuring officers collected demographic traffic stop data in an attempt to address racial profiling.

Lawmakers decided the Registry of Motor Vehicles would be required to track the race, age and gender of every motorist at traffic stops that end in citations to monitor law enforcement for “disproportionate punishment of drivers.” The public safety secretariat annually must give the RMV data to a Massachusetts-based university, nonprofit organization or institution “with experience in the analysis of such data for annual preparation of an analysis and report of its findings.”

The Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS) has issued two reports: one covering 2020 data released in 2022, and one covering 2021 and 2022 data released in 2024. Teams from Salem State University and Worcester State University completed both.

“The issuing of the report has been challenging for us,” Public Safety Secretary Kwon told the Senate Post Audit and Oversight Committee at an Oct. 7 hearing. “The last time when we put out an RFP for it, the bids greatly exceeded our financial ability to pay for said report.”

The reporting requirement was established without a dedicated funding source, EOPSS said when asked about its budget to pay for reports. The agency identified funding within its operating budget to support the initial research contract — which totaled about $300,000 for three years of services — and it said proposals for subsequent procurement efforts in 2025 and 2026 have ranged from around $600,000 to $1 million.

“Traffic stops remain the most common point of contact between people and the police, and understanding the pattern of racial disparities is critical for communities, for legislators, for people who are directly impacted by negative police encounters, and for everyone who’s interested in equity and justice in the Commonwealth,” ACLU of Massachusetts Justice Policy Counsel Katy Naples-Mitchell said when asked about the lack of state reports.

“We can’t manage what we don’t measure,” she added. According to the ACLU, there are also federal grants available to fund racial profiling studies.

“We are committed to adhering to law. We are looking at creative funding and fiscal options to try to get the report out. It is something I recognize that we have not done,” Kwon said. She said the requirement that EOPSS use a Massachusetts nonprofit or university is “maybe” a reason for “some of the difficulties that we’ve had with getting a research partner.”

Sen. Mark Montigny, who chaired the hearing and was an architect of the 2019 law, told Kwon, “If there’s not enough money and you can’t find it creatively, you’ve got to come back to us.”

Kwon named another challenge: “There’s not really a clear, one way of analyzing the data. So when the initial report was issued, there was a lot of criticism in the methodology that the research partner used.” She said she doesn’t believe there’s “a national best practice that all racial disparity reports should be done in this way.”

A summary of public comments received about the 2020 uniform citation data analysis report includes “methodological shortcomings,” including that “the driving population needs to be identified as a starting point for analysis,” and that there were “no verbal warning stops included.” A 2023 USA Today investigation “raises serious questions about how the study was procured, influenced and framed by staff at the state’s public safety agency,” according to reporters, despite the agency saying researchers didn’t find support for patterns of racial disparity.

Montigny replied to Kwon, “I have to believe that some state has done it well, and if not, I’d love to know because I always feel that the first thing we should do is look and see, you know, is there anyone who’s got a best practice, or are we just reaching?”

“It’s a tough subject, but after really tough negotiations, it is law. So we have to figure out how to solve it,” Montigny continued.

The ACLU remains “very interested in seeing a commitment to a true independent analysis of data as part of that obligation under state law,” Naples-Mitchell said.

The secretariat must make the annual analysis and report publicly available. If analysis and reports suggest that an agency has engaged in racial or gender profiling, that agency is required for a year to collect information, “including the reason for the stop, in addition to the other information already required under the Massachusetts Uniform Citation, on all traffic stops, including those not resulting in a warning, citation or arrest,” and mandate implicit bias training.

EOPSS said data collection is ongoing and it is evaluating funding options. The agency in May issued a solicitation for bidders to “conduct yearly data analyses of law enforcement related state and local motor vehicle citations issued throughout the Commonwealth and provide [the Office of Grants and Research] with an annual report of its findings.”

The public safety secretariat’s fiscal 2026 budget totaled more than $1.6 billion, with appropriations for the Department of Correction and the State Police representing the two biggest accounts within the EOPSS budget.