OK,
just for the record.
All
seven members of the Spokane City Council have supported, in principle, the
need for independent, investigatory oversight of the Police Department, and
opposed any agreement with the Spokane Police Guild that will
preclude that.
All
seven. Council President Ben Stuckart, and council members Mike Allen, Mike
Fagan, Nancy McLaughlin, Steve Salvatori, Jon Snyder and Amber Waldref.
We
must not forget this, nor can we allow them to forget this, now that there is a
very strong whiff in the air of the half-measure, of capitulation,
of acquiescence.
There
is a very strong whiff in the air of “better than nothing.”
If
the auguries prove correct, only these seven will stand between the citizens of
Spokane and better than nothing. They will face an enormous amount of pressure.
They will be forced to consider dire consequences – real ones – if they do not
go along with better than nothing. Better than nothing will be offered as an
alternative to the chokehold that the Guild has on the city in terms of legal
options and precedent. These seven could very easily be left with no truly good
choices. They could be forced into a place where principle and practicality do
not intersect.
The
public must remind and keep reminding these seven – relentlessly – what they
voted for in February and what now is enshrined in the City Charter.
Someone
besides the cops must investigate the cops.
Perhaps
none of this will come to pass. Perhaps the tentative agreement between the
mayor and the Guild actually will satisfy the mandates of Proposition 1 and the
City Charter. Or perhaps there is some long-game strategy here, in which the
contract omits independent investigations but the council is able to establish
it outside the contract.
Maybe
everything will work out just fine. Maybe the clear, unambiguous will of the citizens
will be done.
But
for a lot of hints to the contrary, consider what happened Monday. The council
was to vote on a proposal to implement Prop 1. This proposal included an
important caveat: If the ordinance mucked up contract negotiations in any way,
that portion of it would be held in abeyance.
At
the last minute, the council was subjected to a full-court press, from the
chief of police and others, begging them not to pass the part of the ordinance
that would have given the ombudsman’s office full investigative power. They
were assured, council members said, that the tentative contract agreement would
have some simply wonderful elements in it. They were also assured that if they
passed it, the Guild would immediately file an unfair labor practices complaint
and reject the tentative agreement.
The
council demurred, voting to establish an oversight commission but not to give
the ombudsman investigative power. Stuckart outlined a positive-sounding
scenario: The council will hold public hearings on the proposed contract in
November, before voting on it. If it falls short of the public’s wishes, he
said, the council could reject it then. Bringing this out into the light will
be best in the long run.
But
what do the shadowy events of Monday night foreshadow? A big victory for public
oversight? Or an onrushing train full of better than nothing?
To
recap: The City Council was going to create the independent oversight that 70
percent of voters asked for eight months ago. The Guild threatened to file a
grievance. The City Council backed off.
They
may have done so wisely. But it is now more important than ever that the
citizens of Spokane do not forget what these seven people who represent us have
pledged to do. Because it is very, very likely that these seven – all
hard-working and honorable folks, all acting in good faith – will soon be faced
with very, very difficult decisions regarding the Police Department and
citizen oversight.
It
is likely that we will soon be discussing proposals that sound like half-measures
and capitulations – measures that sound like “progress.” It is likely that they
will be considering a proposed contract with the Guild that does not include
anything about independent oversight, at least according to people who say they
have reviewed the agreement. It is likely that we will soon be discussing
different notions of what constitutes “independent oversight,” and alternative
approaches to public accountability.
No
one will say it, but there it will be: Better than nothing.
It’s
a hard thing we’re trying to do here, to cram accountability onto a group of
public employees that has resisted it with everything they’ve got. Their
resistance only makes it more urgent: Someone besides the cops must investigate
the cops.
To
get there, the public has to become as obstinate, as unyielding, as determined
as the Spokane Police Guild. It must become just as deaf to the entreaties of
compromise and practicality – as singular and blindly unreasonable – as the
Spokane Police Guild.
Maybe
then we can get what we voted for.
Shawn Vestal can be
reached at (509) 459-5431 or shawnv@spokesman.com.
Follow him on Twitter at @vestal13.