The Spokane City Council rejected a new labor contract with the police union that failed to give an ombudsman the power to conduct independent investigations into police wrongdoing.
The 7-0 Monday vote fulfills a council promise and brushes aside Mayor David Condon’s deal with the Spokane Police Guild. The council demanded a tougher pact that includes ombudsman powers that voters approved at the polls in February: Give an ombudsman powers to investigate rather than rely on the practice of having police officers investigate other police officers.
The bargaining teams will negotiate again, and council members said they hope the guild accepts the call for stronger ombudsman authority.
“We are not there yet, and we need to take this step,” Councilman Jon Snyder said prior to voting against the contract.
Councilman Mike Allen said the tentative agreement “does not rise to what the citizens voted on.”
Condon said he was disappointed by the council vote. The tentative deal created sufficient ombudsman independence through a separate citizen commission, he said. The guild had accepted that change in the contract proposal.
Condon and police Chief Frank Straub were concerned that any evidence from an outside investigation by the ombudsman could not be used later for internal discipline of an officer.
The mayor also said the tentative agreement allowed the commission to order an investigation, and the ombudsman would have made separate, independent findings.
The mayor’s bargain also included outfitting officers with body cameras, pay raises for police and the hiring of 25 new officers next year.
It all pointed toward progress for better policing, he said.
That’s now in jeopardy if bargaining reopens, Condon said.
The city risks having to go to binding arbitration with its police force and take what an arbiter awards.
The police guild’s attorney, in a recent letter, said that the issue of having someone other than a police officer investigate possible wrongdoing by other police officers must be bargained and approved by the union.
Councilman Steve Salvatori said he wanted assurances from the guild that it would not challenge independent power for the ombudsman.
The guild, apparently, is not willing to do that.
Councilwoman Amber Waldref said, “I think it is unfortunate we couldn’t get to that place. I think it is unfortunate we were put in this position.”
The tentative agreement, approved earlier by guild members, was added to the council agenda Monday afternoon after council members spent 30 minutes huddling with their attorneys in private session.
Asked about the surprise vote, Council President Ben Stuckart said: “We’ve been waiting long enough.”
Just prior to the vote, Stuckart said he did not want the city to be stuck with an unfavorable contract for the next few years.
Erin Jacobson, an assistant city attorney who worked on the negotiations, told council members that the guild was unwilling to approve any changes regarding ombudsman powers.
One issue is whether the ombudsman would be allowed to conduct “non-disciplinary investigations” outside of the internal affairs process. The contract agreement did not give the ombudsman that power.
In a related matter, the mayor said a team of a half dozen experts from the U.S. Department of Justice will be in Spokane next week to review the department’s use of force investigations, department culture, and the ombudsman’s role.
The tentative contract had called for 2 percent salary increases annually from the start of 2012, when the previous contract expired, through the start of 2015, plus monetary benefits for college education.
The cost of the contract was $1.8 million in additional salary at the end of four years, not counting the education benefits.
Councilman Mike Fagan in an interview said that he voted no for more than one reason. He wants an independent ombudsman, but also believed the salary increases were “too fat. It’s too rich. As far as I’m concerned I think the Police Guild owes the citizens of Spokane.”
Showing posts with label fairfax county police. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fairfax county police. Show all posts
PRINCETON: police oversight
Mayor Liz Lempert cast
the tie-breaking vote Monday to back a measure that gives the town’s municipal
administrator the civilian oversight of the Princeton Police Department.
Mayor Lempert, speaking prior to voting for the first time as mayor, expressed disappointment that the divided Princeton Council could not reach consensus on an issue that officials had been debating for a while.
She and council members Bernard P. Miller, Lance Liverman and Heather H. Howard were against giving that oversight to the mayor and council. The ordinance they supported, one that puts that authority in the hands of the town administrator, needs to come up for a public hearing Sept. 23 and be followed by a vote to adopt it.
The slender 4-3 margin of Monday’s decision was not a surprise, given the comments officials on both sides of the issue had been making headed into the council meeting. Some officials felt strongly that the council and the mayor should not abdicate their responsibility as the public’s representatives on a matter too critical to delegate to a municipal employee.
Prior to casting her vote, Councilwoman Jo S. Butler said public safety is “the most important” function that municipal government provides. She expressed deep dissatisfaction with the amount of information-sharing going on about the police force, feeling access has been limited to a select few in government.
Mayor Lempert, speaking prior to voting for the first time as mayor, expressed disappointment that the divided Princeton Council could not reach consensus on an issue that officials had been debating for a while.
She and council members Bernard P. Miller, Lance Liverman and Heather H. Howard were against giving that oversight to the mayor and council. The ordinance they supported, one that puts that authority in the hands of the town administrator, needs to come up for a public hearing Sept. 23 and be followed by a vote to adopt it.
The slender 4-3 margin of Monday’s decision was not a surprise, given the comments officials on both sides of the issue had been making headed into the council meeting. Some officials felt strongly that the council and the mayor should not abdicate their responsibility as the public’s representatives on a matter too critical to delegate to a municipal employee.
Prior to casting her vote, Councilwoman Jo S. Butler said public safety is “the most important” function that municipal government provides. She expressed deep dissatisfaction with the amount of information-sharing going on about the police force, feeling access has been limited to a select few in government.
She
joined council members Jenny Crumiller and Patrick Simon in opposing the
ordinance that makes Administrator Robert W. Bruschi the “appropriate
authority,” as it is called.
On the other hand, some officials felt it important to avoid politicizing the department and thought it made sense to have one person, namely Mr. Bruschi, be the civilian oversight instead of the mayor and the council.
Councilwoman Heather H. Howard said in consulting with the New Jersey State League of Municipalities and other sources, the view was overwhelming that the administrator should be the “appropriate authority.”
”And universally without any equivocation, all of them said it should be the administrator,” Mayor Lempert said at a press conference earlier Monday before the meeting.
Prior to consolidation, Mayor Lempert and the four other members of the Township Committee acted as the appropriate authority over the police. Mayor Lempert was asked what was wrong with that arrangement.
”As a new government, I try not to view things as ‘how did we do it in the township? Let’s do it that way,’” Mayor Lempert said. “And I would hope my colleagues from the borough aren’t saying, ‘This is the way we did it in the borough. This is how we should do it now.’”
On the other hand, some officials felt it important to avoid politicizing the department and thought it made sense to have one person, namely Mr. Bruschi, be the civilian oversight instead of the mayor and the council.
Councilwoman Heather H. Howard said in consulting with the New Jersey State League of Municipalities and other sources, the view was overwhelming that the administrator should be the “appropriate authority.”
”And universally without any equivocation, all of them said it should be the administrator,” Mayor Lempert said at a press conference earlier Monday before the meeting.
Prior to consolidation, Mayor Lempert and the four other members of the Township Committee acted as the appropriate authority over the police. Mayor Lempert was asked what was wrong with that arrangement.
”As a new government, I try not to view things as ‘how did we do it in the township? Let’s do it that way,’” Mayor Lempert said. “And I would hope my colleagues from the borough aren’t saying, ‘This is the way we did it in the borough. This is how we should do it now.’”
PRINCETON: police oversight
Mayor Liz Lempert cast
the tie-breaking vote Monday to back a measure that gives the town’s municipal
administrator the civilian oversight of the Princeton Police Department.
Mayor Lempert, speaking prior to voting for the first time as mayor, expressed disappointment that the divided Princeton Council could not reach consensus on an issue that officials had been debating for a while.
She and council members Bernard P. Miller, Lance Liverman and Heather H. Howard were against giving that oversight to the mayor and council. The ordinance they supported, one that puts that authority in the hands of the town administrator, needs to come up for a public hearing Sept. 23 and be followed by a vote to adopt it.
The slender 4-3 margin of Monday’s decision was not a surprise, given the comments officials on both sides of the issue had been making headed into the council meeting. Some officials felt strongly that the council and the mayor should not abdicate their responsibility as the public’s representatives on a matter too critical to delegate to a municipal employee.
Prior to casting her vote, Councilwoman Jo S. Butler said public safety is “the most important” function that municipal government provides. She expressed deep dissatisfaction with the amount of information-sharing going on about the police force, feeling access has been limited to a select few in government.
Mayor Lempert, speaking prior to voting for the first time as mayor, expressed disappointment that the divided Princeton Council could not reach consensus on an issue that officials had been debating for a while.
She and council members Bernard P. Miller, Lance Liverman and Heather H. Howard were against giving that oversight to the mayor and council. The ordinance they supported, one that puts that authority in the hands of the town administrator, needs to come up for a public hearing Sept. 23 and be followed by a vote to adopt it.
The slender 4-3 margin of Monday’s decision was not a surprise, given the comments officials on both sides of the issue had been making headed into the council meeting. Some officials felt strongly that the council and the mayor should not abdicate their responsibility as the public’s representatives on a matter too critical to delegate to a municipal employee.
Prior to casting her vote, Councilwoman Jo S. Butler said public safety is “the most important” function that municipal government provides. She expressed deep dissatisfaction with the amount of information-sharing going on about the police force, feeling access has been limited to a select few in government.
She
joined council members Jenny Crumiller and Patrick Simon in opposing the
ordinance that makes Administrator Robert W. Bruschi the “appropriate
authority,” as it is called.
On the other hand, some officials felt it important to avoid politicizing the department and thought it made sense to have one person, namely Mr. Bruschi, be the civilian oversight instead of the mayor and the council.
Councilwoman Heather H. Howard said in consulting with the New Jersey State League of Municipalities and other sources, the view was overwhelming that the administrator should be the “appropriate authority.”
”And universally without any equivocation, all of them said it should be the administrator,” Mayor Lempert said at a press conference earlier Monday before the meeting.
Prior to consolidation, Mayor Lempert and the four other members of the Township Committee acted as the appropriate authority over the police. Mayor Lempert was asked what was wrong with that arrangement.
”As a new government, I try not to view things as ‘how did we do it in the township? Let’s do it that way,’” Mayor Lempert said. “And I would hope my colleagues from the borough aren’t saying, ‘This is the way we did it in the borough. This is how we should do it now.’”
On the other hand, some officials felt it important to avoid politicizing the department and thought it made sense to have one person, namely Mr. Bruschi, be the civilian oversight instead of the mayor and the council.
Councilwoman Heather H. Howard said in consulting with the New Jersey State League of Municipalities and other sources, the view was overwhelming that the administrator should be the “appropriate authority.”
”And universally without any equivocation, all of them said it should be the administrator,” Mayor Lempert said at a press conference earlier Monday before the meeting.
Prior to consolidation, Mayor Lempert and the four other members of the Township Committee acted as the appropriate authority over the police. Mayor Lempert was asked what was wrong with that arrangement.
”As a new government, I try not to view things as ‘how did we do it in the township? Let’s do it that way,’” Mayor Lempert said. “And I would hope my colleagues from the borough aren’t saying, ‘This is the way we did it in the borough. This is how we should do it now.’”
NYPD Monitor Plan Prompts Police Unions To Fight Against Oversight
NEW YORK — New York City's police unions are seeking to stop a federal monitor from overseeing the NYPD.
The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association filed motions Thursday in Manhattan federal court on behalf of four police unions, and the Sergeant's Benevolent Association filed separately.
They took the first steps to appeal a federal judge's decision last month on the department's stop and frisk policy and are asking the court to intervene in the case.
Police have stopped, questioned and sometimes patted down about 5 million people over the past decade. The judge ruled that the policy violated the civil rights of hundreds of thousands of black and Hispanic men. She ordered a monitor to oversee changes to the policy including officer training, supervision, and paperwork.
If the motions are granted, they unions say they will allow them to have an active role in the appeal and any changes that come.
"Police officers, detectives, lieutenants and captains are the boots on the ground in the fight against crime and terrorism," said Patrick Lynch, president of the patrolmen's union, the largest in the country. "The establishment of a federal monitor may directly impact our members' safety, day-to-day responsibilities, and collective bargaining and other rights. So we believe that we should have standing to participate in arguing the appeal in order to protect those rights."
The police officers say in court papers that some of the changes proposed by the judge are not feasible for officers, and may lead to hastily-drafted accounts of encounters that could result in omissions and errors. Those problems could affect the officer down the road.
The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association filed motions Thursday in Manhattan federal court on behalf of four police unions, and the Sergeant's Benevolent Association filed separately.
They took the first steps to appeal a federal judge's decision last month on the department's stop and frisk policy and are asking the court to intervene in the case.
Police have stopped, questioned and sometimes patted down about 5 million people over the past decade. The judge ruled that the policy violated the civil rights of hundreds of thousands of black and Hispanic men. She ordered a monitor to oversee changes to the policy including officer training, supervision, and paperwork.
If the motions are granted, they unions say they will allow them to have an active role in the appeal and any changes that come.
"Police officers, detectives, lieutenants and captains are the boots on the ground in the fight against crime and terrorism," said Patrick Lynch, president of the patrolmen's union, the largest in the country. "The establishment of a federal monitor may directly impact our members' safety, day-to-day responsibilities, and collective bargaining and other rights. So we believe that we should have standing to participate in arguing the appeal in order to protect those rights."
The police officers say in court papers that some of the changes proposed by the judge are not feasible for officers, and may lead to hastily-drafted accounts of encounters that could result in omissions and errors. Those problems could affect the officer down the road.
Task force on police oversight may grow
ALBUQUERQUE (KRQE) - Two Albuquerque city councilors want to
expand a new group tasked with improving the commission that polices the
police.
The Police Oversight Commission looks at citizen complaints
against police officers, but some say it has no teeth.
So city councilors approved a plan and seated an 11-member
task force made up of community members, retired cops and representatives of
nonprofit groups to try and fix the problems.
On Friday Councilors Brad Winter and Rey Garduño said they
plan on introducing legislation next month to add four more members to make the
task force more diverse.
NYC Lawmakers Override Bloomberg On Police Oversight
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg speaks at a news
conference with New York Police Department Commissioner Ray Kelly last week.
Originally published on Thu August 22, 2013 7:30 pm
New York's City Council has approved a new layer of
oversight for the nation's largest police force, overriding Mayor Michael
Bloomberg weeks after the NYPD's stop-and-frisk tactics were deemed
"indirect racial profiling" of blacks and Latinos.
NPR's Joel Rose reports that the council voted to override
Bloomberg's veto and pass two police oversight bills: one that would create an
inspector general for the NYPD and another that would make it easier to sue for
racial profiling.
City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said most individuals
being stopped by the police are not doing anything wrong. "People who were
not arrested. Charged with no crimes. That is a practice that is
unconstitutional and must come to an end," Quinn said.
Joel says Quinn, who is running for mayor, voted for the
bill to create an inspector general overseeing the NYPD but against the second
bill making it easier for individuals to sue for racial profiling.
NAACP President Ben Jealous hailed the vote to approve the
two measures despite the mayor's veto as an important step in ending racial
profiling.
"What happens in NYC has consequences for the
nation," Jealous said. "The policies of the NYPD inspire the policies
and practices of police departments across the nation."
Last week, U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin ruled
that police had been systematically stopping people in the street without any
evidence or reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing in what amounted to racial
profiling.
No Minneapolis cops have been disciplined after 439 complaints
Of 439 cases involving Minneapolis police misconduct handled
by a new office created last fall, not one so far has resulted in discipline of
a police officer.
Police department officials say those numbers obscure gains
made in responding to citizen complaints about police behavior, but skeptics
say the few cases of actual discipline confirm that the new system is not
working any better than the one it replaced.
“I believe there has been considerable progress,” said
Medaria Arradondo, commander of police internal affairs, who reviews complaints
along with Michael Browne, director of the new conduct review office.
“The criticism was that it would not improve process and
lead to less discipline,” said Teresa Nelson, legal director of the American
Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota. “The numbers show that those criticisms
were accurate.”
The question of how Minneapolis police disciplines its own
is facing fresh scrutiny after several recent incidents involving Minneapolis
police officers. Two of the incidents involved off-duty officers accused of
fighting with black men and using racial slurs in Green Bay, Wis., and Apple
Valley, and led Police Chief Janeé Harteau to convene a citizens advisory group
this summer.
In addition, the city of Minneapolis made $14 million in
payouts for alleged police misconduct between 2006 and 2012, but the
Minneapolis Police Department rarely concluded that the officers involved in
those cases did anything wrong, according to a Star Tribune analysis.
In the past, complaints against police could be lodged with
the Police Civilian Review Authority (CRA). The CRA board had criticized
then-Police Chief Tim Dolan for failing to impose discipline it had
recommended. The CRA was dismantled in 2012 and replaced with the Office of
Police Conduct Review by the Minneapolis City Council.
Under the new system Arradondo and Browne reviewed 439 cases
and sent 17 of them to a conduct review panel to see if discipline was
warranted. A big group of cases was dismissed because they were older than 270
days.
All 17 cases that were forwarded involved incidents
initially reported to the old CRA.
The new review panel, consisting of two police lieutenants
and two citizens appointed by the City Council, decided seven of the 17 cases
merited possible discipline and forwarded its findings to Harteau.
Assistant Chief Matt Clark concluded that five of the seven
were “nondisciplinary violations” and only eligible for coaching. That left two
for Harteau for possible discipline. She has yet to rule on them.
Harteau is on vacation and unavailable, her office said.
Arradondo said he was barred by the state Data Practices Act
from giving details of the five cases that Clark found were not subject to
discipline.
99 cases sent for coaching
Both Arradondo and Browne say it’s too early to judge the
new office, which consists of two civilian investigators and seven
investigators who are police officers. A complainant can request a civilian
investigator.
Browne said the office had taken big steps in clearing the
backlog of CRA cases.
He said a major change is that the office sent 99 complaints
involving minor violations to the precincts, where supervisors coach officers
to improve their interactions with the public.
Arradondo said the complaint process has been streamlined
but said, “we still have a lot of work to do to improve upon, both in the areas
of building public confidence in the process and infrastructure in terms of
staffing.”
Indeed, the lack of discipline resulting from the 439 cases
has raised eyebrows.
“It certainly would raise red flags about the objectivity of
the office,” said Brian Buchner, vice president of the National Association of
Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement. “People should be asking questions and
the council should be asking questions about whether it’s effective … Any time
you have as significant a revamping as has been done in Minneapolis, the
decisionmakers have an obligation to evaluate the impact.”
While he does not dismiss the role of discipline, Browne
said the focus on coaching officers is designed to change police culture. Among
the complaints referred for coaching are accusations that officers were rude,
he said.
Browne said he wants officers to think about “garnering
respect of the community, not because of the discipline, but what is best for
society. … If you only use the hammer you aren’t using all the tools in the
toolbox to effect the change.”
Slurs against a protected class, be it race, gender or
sexual orientation, are not minor violations and are subject to discipline.
‘Police-dominated process’
Samuel Walker, professor emeritus at the University Nebraska
Omaha and author of two books on police accountability, said coaching “has a
lot of merit to it.”
But he said it was “troubling” there had been no discipline.
“I am disturbed about that and that it is a police-dominated process with
citizen input.”
Both Walker and the Minnesota ACLU’s Nelson endorsed
Buchner’s call for an independent review of the new office.
Ron Edwards, a longtime civil rights activist, said the data
show that cases get “filtered” out before reaching Harteau. “I don’t think
citizens are getting much for their dollar,” he said.
Another layer of oversight is coming. A new Police Conduct
Oversight Commission consisting of seven civilians appointed by the mayor and
City Council will routinely audit the way complaints are handled. “With input
from the commission, the process will continue to be evaluated for
effectiveness and additional changes will be proposed to the mayor and City
Council when warranted,” according to the city’s website.
The Internal Affairs Unit investigates other complaints that
do not go through the conduct review office. In 2012, 29 officers were sent to
supervisors for coaching, 11 got reprimand letters, four were suspended and
three were terminated.
In 2013, only 25 cases, aside from the police oversight
unit, were investigated by Internal Affairs, leading to one reprimand letter
and one suspension, Arradondo said. He attributed the smaller number of cases
to coaching.
None of the cases filed since the oversight office opened
has gone to the review panel. In September four more citizens will be added to
the panel after a City Council hearing.
“We’re still putting in elements,” said Browne, who said
cases now move more swiftly and can be tracked far better. “Next year we will
have comparative data and we can look at different trends,” he said.
Neighbors demand police accountability
Syracuse – Dozens of complaints about police have been filed
with the Syracuse Citizen Review Board for the past two years.
Members of United as One believe there is a systematic
problem with police misconduct in Syracuse that will require a cultural shift
and more accountability within the ranks.
“That means checking misconduct, correcting misconduct when
it occurs and not relying on a member of the public, who perhaps has been
charged with a crime, to come back and complain and perhaps put themselves at
risk,” said Barrie Gewanter, Director of the local chapter of the New York
Civil Liberties Union.
Members of United as One asked neighbors to share their
stories Wednesday night, in an effort to ensure that alleged cases of police
misconduct aren't overlooked.
"The police are constantly 24/7 policing this place and
everywhere you look they've got some kid thrown against the wall, some kid down
on the ground,” said Cheryl Ross, who lives in Syracuse.
The meeting comes weeks after a video emerged showing a
disabled man being tased by Syracuse Police after he refused to leave a bus.
The story prompted Syracuse Common Councilors to review the
police department's taser policy.
New York City Council passes police oversight measures
To cheers from the audience, the New York City Council voted
to institute tough new rules regulating the city’s police department.
“The Committee of the Whole recommends passing both bills,
the objection of the Mayor notwithstanding.”
The votes override a veto by Mayor Michael Bloomberg from
earlier this summer. The new rules put oversight measures in place, like adding
an inspector general position and streamlining community claims of
discrimination by the department. The votes come about two weeks after a
federal judge ruled the NYPD’s stop and frisk policies violated civil rights.
Council Speaker and mayoral candidate Christine Quinn said the new inspector
general will ensure stop and frisk comes to an end…
“But as importantly, we'll help make sure that no other
police practices in the future ever get to the point where a federal judge has
to intervene and tell us that our police department has been acting
unconstitutionally.”
Mayor Boomberg has said the stop and frisk ruling and the
oversight legislation undermine public safety. Last Friday, the city appealed
the federal ruling.
Detroit police oversight board functions curtailed
Detroit— The Board of Police Commissioners, the citizen
oversight board that rules on Detroit police policy and personnel matters, is
in limbo.
The board can’t make decisions because there are only three
members, one short of a quorum — and even if all the seats were filled, an
executive order by Emergency Manager Kevyn Orr gave Police Chief James Craig
the ability to bypass the board on personnel matters, one of its most crucial
functions.
Commissioner Jerome Warfield is planning a public meeting to
let residents know what’s going on. He said he’s made several requests to Orr
to appoint at least one member to give the board a quorum, but hasn’t gotten an
answer.
“It’s important that the citizens don’t lose their voice and
power,” Warfield said. “We need the EM to make a decision — either the board is
still in effect or not. And, if not, let’s stop the charade and stop meeting
every week.”
Although the board’s powers are limited under the emergency
manager, Orr spokesman Bill Nowling said it still performs a valuable function.
“I hear the criticism, but just because the board doesn’t
have a quorum, there’s still a process for citizens to air grievances, and for
questions to be asked and looked into,” he said.
Voters approved a civilian Board of Police Commissioners in
1974, with its five members to be appointed by the mayor. Under the new City
Charter that passed the 2012 ballot, the board will have 11 members, seven of
whom will be elected, with the remaining four mayoral appointments.
Regarding the appointment of a board member, Nowling said
Orr is likely to take the same approach he’s taken with City Council members
who’ve abdicated their positions: “He’s chosen not to replace them, and will
let the electoral process take care of that in November,” he said.
Currently, Warfield, Chairwoman Jessica Taylor and Donnell
White are the three board members. When Toney Stewart’s term ended recently, he
was not replaced. The board has been operating for months with only four
commissioners, although that was enough for a quorum.
According to its website, the board’s mission is “to
increase public confidence in the Detroit Police Department by providing
accountability through competent, objective and effective civilian oversight.”
That confidence is eroding, said Ron Scott, director of the
Detroit Coalition Against Police Brutality, who raised the issue at Thursday’s
board meeting.
“I’ve had it up to here with this dictatorship,” Scott said.
He asked Warfield to hold a hearing to let the public know what the board’s
role is.
“I agree, the idea for a hearing is timely,” Warfield said.
“We’ll schedule that meeting.” No date has been set.
Scott said the board’s denuding has set the city back “all
the way to 1959.”
“Citizen oversight is just that,” Scott said. “That’s not
what’s happening now. If the police commission has been gutted, then all the
reforms that took place are nullified.”
ACLU, Albuquerque reach settlement in police oversight commission lawsuit
ALBUQUERQUE, New Mexico — The American Civil Liberties Union
of New Mexico and the city of Albuquerque reached a settlement Wednesday in a
freedom-of-speech lawsuit against the Albuquerque Police Oversight Commission.
Under the terms of the settlement, the city agreed to move
to increase the public comment limit from two to three minutes before the
commission and permit some speakers to donate their time. The city also agreed
to pay $14,000 in damages and attorneys' fees.
"We are very pleased that our rights to Free Speech
were affirmed through this settlement," said plaintiff Kenneth Ellis, Jr.,
in a statement released by the ACLU. "As the father of a son who was
wrongfully killed by Albuquerque police, I must speak out about the problems
with the police and the Police Oversight Commission — even when the government
doesn't like what I have to say."
Early this year, the Ellis family won one of the biggest
awards in city history — $10.3 million — stemming from an officer-involved
shooting. In that case, Officer Brett Lampiris-Tremba fatally shot Iraq War
veteran Kenneth Ellis III in the neck during a nine-minute encounter with
police in which Ellis held a gun to his own head.
The ACLU filed the lawsuit after the civilian board limited
the public comment period during a mid-December meeting.
The commission reviews allegations of police misconduct and
excessive force.
Albuquerque's police department has been plagued by a number
of high-profile cases alleging excessive force. Since 2010, the city also has
seen more than two dozen officer-involved shootings.
New York City Lawmakers Approve Plans For Police Oversight
New York City lawmakers have passed the most expansive plans
in years to impose new oversight on the nation's largest police force.
The City Council voted early Thursday to create an outside
watchdog and make it easier to bring racial profiling claims against the New
York Police Department.
Both bills passed with enough votes to override expected
mayoral vetoes.
Proponents see the legislation as a check on a police force
that's come under scrutiny for its heavy use of a tactic known as stop and
frisk and its extensive surveillance of Muslims, which was revealed in stories
by The Associated Press.
Critics say the measures would impinge on techniques that
have decreased crime dramatically and would hamper the NYPD.
A pending federal court case could add separate monitoring.
Albuquerque
Albuquerque
will hold town hall meetings on overhauling its police oversight system as New
Mexico's largest city faces a federal investigation over police excessive force
cases.
Portland police oversight official stepping down
Bloomberg slams bills aimed at NYPD oversight
STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. -- Mayor Michael Bloomberg slammed legislation aimed at increasing oversight of the New York City Police Department -- and the politicians and interest groups behind the bills -- in a speech to NYPD brass at One Police Plaza Tuesday.
After lauding Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and members of the department for record-low crime statistics -- with murder down 32 percent so far this year, even after 2012 saw the fewest murders in modern history -- Bloomberg criticized legislation proposing an Inspector General for the NYPD and another bill that would tighten racial profiling laws.
Despite lowering crime -- and incarcerations and police shootings -- Bloomberg said the NYPD "is under attack, probably because this is an election year."
"The attacks most often come from those who play no constructive role in keeping our city safe, but rather view their jobs as pointing fingers from the steps of City Hall," Bloomberg said.
Bloomberg said critics "could not be more wrong" when they assert that the Stop, Question and Frisk program and the department's counter-terrorism intelligence gathering target people by race or ethnicity. Stops are conducted based on seeing something suspicious, or witness descriptions, Bloomberg said.
"The attacks most often come from those who play no constructive role in keeping our city safe, but rather view their jobs as pointing fingers from the steps of City Hall," Bloomberg said.
An Inspector General would make it harder for the police to maintain "unity of command," he said.
"Whose policies should an officer on the street follow -- and how would he or she know that their partner would be following the same procedures when the bullets start flying?" Bloomberg asked. "With confusion comes deadly consequences to our police officers and to the public that they are sworn to protect."
He said the bill could also undermine the city's work with other agencies on counter-terrorism measures -- other law enforcement might be less willing to share information if it could be released to the Inspector General and City Council.
"Passing any legislation that undermines our counter-terrorism capabilities would be the height of irresponsibility," Bloomberg said. "God forbid terrorists succeed in striking our city because of a politically-driven law that undermines the NYPD's intelligence gathering efforts."
As for the racial profiling bill -- part of a package of legislation called the Community Safety Act -- Bloomberg said the administration already has "absolutely zero tolerance for racial profiling."
The bill would stop the NYPD from using information like gender, age and race to identify suspects, Bloomberg said. If a suspect is a 20-something white man in a blue windbreaker, Bloomberg said, the only detail the officer could use as a lead would be the windbreaker.
"That means the law would require the officer to ignore all the information provided by the witness except the color of the windbreaker, and the officer would have to stop 80-year-old black women if they're wearing blue windbreakers," he said. "Even more absurd, if they stop someone who perfectly fits the description provided -- a 20-something white man wearing a blue windbreaker -- and that person turns out not to be the shooter, that person could sue the NYPD."
If it passes, "all officers would be under threat of going to trial for doing their jobs," Bloomberg said.
Bloomberg said the assertion that Stop, Question and Frisk unfairly targets minorities is based on comparing the stops to the general population -- when they should be compared to the descriptions of suspects in violent crimes. More than 90 percent of suspects in murders are black or Latino, Bloomberg said -- and so are 90 percent of murder victims, meaning they'd be put at risk by fewer stops.
"Make no mistake, this is a dangerous a piece of legislation -- and anyone who supports it is courting disaster," Bloomberg said.
Bloomberg's criticism wasn't just aimed at some of those hoping to take his job -- many Democratic mayoral candidates, including Council Speaker Christine Quinn, support the IG bill. He also targeted media outlets that have opposed Stop, Question and Frisk.
He invoked the murder of a 17-year-old Bronx resident, Alphonso Bryant, who was shot and killed last week. His death lead to no outrage from special interest groups, and wasn't mentioned in the city's "paper of record," the New York Times, Bloomberg said.
"Do you think that if a white 17-year-old prep student from Manhattan had been murdered, the Times would have ignored it?" Bloomberg asked. "Me neither."
Four days later, the paper's editorial board slammed Stop, Question and Frisk, Bloomberg said, calling it "widely-loathed."
"Let me tell you what I loathe. I loathe that 17-year minority children can be senselessly murdered in the Bronx -- and some of the media doesn't even consider it news," Bloomberg said. "I loathe that parents have to bury their children -- and children have to bury their parents because there are too many guns on our streets."
Bloomberg said there's no question crime can drop lower in the city.
"The question is whether elected officials and special interest groups will allow you to. Will they trust you and will they have your back? God help us if they don't -- and may God protect you, and may God protect all of us," Bloomberg said.
Oakland mayor calls for increased police training, civilian oversight to reduce shootings
OAKLAND -- Renewing her call for increased oversight of the police, Mayor Jean Quan on Thursday said better training, an updated computer system and a civilian watchdog similar to San Jose's would help Oakland address a troubling number of officer-involved shootings.
The mayor's comments came in response to an investigation by this newspaper, published Thursday, that highlighted a history of questionable police shootings in Oakland and a culture of failing to thoroughly investigate them.
While the department is already under the unprecedented scrutiny of the federal court to adopt widespread reforms, the mayor said a civilian inspector general would add another layer of accountability. She said she hopes to soon add the position to independently review internal affairs findings and make recommendations on officer discipline.
The department already has its own inspector general's office. It is charged with auditing programs and expenditures and tracking efforts to meet reforms ordered more than a decade ago by a federal judge in the wake of the Riders police abuse scandal.
What Quan has proposed is a new, civilian position, reporting directly to the mayor and city administrator.
"I want someone who is not a member of the force," Quan said, pointing to San Jose's use of an independent police auditor staffed with lawyers who review disciplinary cases and complaints against officers.
The plan needs the approval of the department's new federal compliance director, former Baltimore Police Department Commissioner Thomas Frazier, who was appointed in March to usher in reforms. Frazier could not be reached for comment.
Oakland police union president Barry Donelan declined to comment on Quan's proposal, calling Thursday's report on police shootings by this newspaper biased against the department.
Oakland police Sgt. Christopher Bolton, the department's chief of staff, had no response to Quan's proposal but said he would welcome her promise for new technology to help the department better track police shootings.
Oakland police have struggled to tally shootings over the years, blaming an antiquated computer system.
The newspaper's extensive review of police reports, district attorney's files, civil lawsuits and news accounts of police shootings since 2000 found police fired on people at least 117 times, killing 39.
The review found two dozen officers involved in multiple shootings. At least nine people who appeared to be fleeing were shot in the back. And while the city has paid out more than $9 million to settle lawsuits over the shootings, internal affairs investigations routinely find the shootings were justified.
Oakland police say officers often have little choice but to defend themselves with lethal force on the streets of one of California's most dangerous cities. Chief Howard Jordan insists the department constantly trains officers to avoid having to fire their weapons.
While Quan says the federal oversight has led to improvements, the mayor said more training would lead to fewer deadly encounters.
"We need to review whether the officers had to be in a (dangerous) position in the first place," she said.
The newspaper also reviewed new documents that raised questions about the department's internal affairs investigation into the 2007 shooting death of Gary King Jr. Last week, almost six years after the shooting, the Alameda County District Attorney's Office finally released a report, clearing Sgt. Patrick Gonzales of any wrongdoing.
On Thursday, Michael Haddad, an attorney who sued the city on behalf of King's family, said the $1.5 million settlement was a "tacit admission" of flaws in the internal affairs investigation and called on District Attorney Nancy O'Malley to re-examine evidence he uncovered.
A spokeswoman from the District Attorney's Office had no comment.
Seattle hires new police oversight director
SEATTLE (AP) — Seattle Mayor
Mike McGinn has announced the hiring of a new police oversight director.
The hiring of Pierce Murphy to
lead the Office of Professional Accountability was announced Friday. The office
is responsible for investigating police misconduct. Murphy was one of eight
finalists for the post.
Murphy's arrival comes at a
time the Seattle Police Department faces a court-overseen monitoring plan to
address the use of force by officers. The department has entered into a
settlement agreement with the U.S. Justice Department that requires an overhaul
of supervision, training and reporting of uses of force.
McGinn says Murphy will help
implement a long-term plan to restore public trust in the police.
The City Council will have to
approve Murphy's appointment.
Murphy serves as the city of
Boise's Community Ombudsman.
Outside Authority Is Essential
John Burris is a lawyer in
Oakland, Calif., specializing in police misconduct cases.He is the author of
"Blue vs. Black: Let's End the Conflict between Cops and Minorities."
UPDATED APRIL 9, 2013, 6:03 PM
After 25 years of taking police
officers to court for misconduct and after reviewing countless internal
affairs' complaints and related investigations, I have concluded there is
little evidence that the public should rely on the integrity of the police
department to police itself.
The results are mixed for
citizen review boards largely because their efforts are often undermined by
inadequate financing, opposition by police unions and the lack of political
will by public officials.
There is little evidence that
the public can rely upon the integrity of the police department to police
itself.
An inspector general within a
department can be useful provided that he or she has the authority to
independently evaluate the chief and command staff, and to assess and audit the
department's compliance with its policies and procedures. Ideally, the
inspector general reports directly to the chief and can assist the chief with
fixing problems and conducting investigations into high visibility matters
before they become a public problem.
But the inspector general will
be ineffective if the chief doesn't respect the position and is unwilling to
accept the findings or follow the recommendations.
I think an inspector general
should be outside the department, reporting directly to the mayor, city
administrator or a police commission that has direct control over the police
department and the chief. Under these conditions, if given the authority, the
inspector general can conduct investigations, review compliance with policies
and address challenging matters of public interest.
To be successful, the inspector
general must report directly to the public official or entity with the
authority to carry out the findings and hold the chief accountable. Otherwise,
the position will be powerless.
If used effectively the
inspector general has the potential to facilitate compliance with departmental
polices, hold the command staff accountable for the actions of the officers and
solve systemic problems. But again the structure and the integrity of the
person will ultimately determine the inspector general's success.
Oversight Without Animosity
Merrick Bobb is the executive
director of the Police Assessment Resource Center and serves as the
court-appointed monitor overseeing a settlement agreement negotiated with the
city of Seattle by the Department of Justice.
APRIL 9, 2013
Advocates for police reform
contend that the police cannot be trusted to police themselves, while the New
York police argue that no one but the police really knows what it is like to be
an urban cop on the dangerous streets. Therefore, advocates want civilian
oversight and the police, at least in more sophisticated venues like Los
Angeles, have learned to live with it. In some places, even the ability even to
investigate police misconduct is taken away from the police.
The trick is to construct
civilian review of the police in a way that is respectful of all perspectives.
The trick is to construct
civilian oversight in a way that is respectful of all perspectives. The Los
Angeles model gives a civilian police commission the power to decide if an
officer-involved shooting or other serious use of force is according to policy
or not. The matter then goes back to a panel of two police officers and one
civilian to decide whether an officer should be disciplined. The chief of
police can order more discipline than the panel but cannot offer less.
Splitting the decision in this
way has marked advantages: the community voice is heard through the commission,
and the civilian perspective acts as a guarantor for the integrity of the
internal investigative process while the police perspective is still honored.
The commission itself has an inspector general, who is empowered to advise the
commission whether a given shooting or use of force is or should be within
policy.
Mixed models like this one
provide reasonable oversight without stripping the police entirely of the
ability to self-discipline.
With that ability come
accountability and responsibility. Civilian oversight makes a judgment how well
the department is acquitting itself. If given the further ability to share with
the mayor the power to hire and fire the chief executive of the police, a good
balance is struck among all the competing interests. The day when civilian
oversight can be completely rebuffed is over. It's time to roll up the sleeves
and figure out what form of oversight is best for New York.
Civilian oversight can also
bring community perspective into police practices like stop and frisk.
Wholesale and largely unproductive dragnets may erode community trust and
goodwill at a much more rapid rate than they get criminals off street.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)