From Acorns into Oaks: Portland's "workshop"
"The role of citizens in democracy is to have some say about their government Anything that is done to shortcut that, or to control that, is going to have some problem."
---Eileen Luna-Firebaugh, before the Portland City Council
In Portland, the controversy that has erupted since the release of a report by consultant, Eileen Luna-Firebaugh continued as the city government met to discuss her proposed recommendations, according to The Oregonian which she finally presented to it and community residents in person.
After everyone left to go outside after the meeting, they were met by a long line of Portland Police Bureau officers dressed up in riot gear who began pepper spraying people who were gathered for a demonstration on the day of the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.
(excerpt)
Deputy city attorney Dave Woboril provided on-the-ground advice to police commanders, as observers from the American Civil Liberties Union and staff from the mayor's and several commissioners' offices stood by and watched the conflict.
"This is the Portland police," an officer blared on a bullhorn, as several police horses moved closer to the crowd and bike officers tried to press the group onto the sidewalk at Southwest Fifth Avenue and Jefferson Street at 1:35 p.m. "You are impeding traffic. Step out of the street, or you will be arrested."
They watched as one officer fired pepper spray into the crowd, which by then had mostly moved to the sidewalk outside the Wells Fargo bank building's entrance. Passers-by flashed cell phone photos of the afternoon confrontation, what appeared to be the only major clash during the anti-war march. One arrest was made.
What was going on inside the chamber was only slightly less combative. Luna-Firebaugh had returned to Oregon to give her presentation to the city government and held fast even after being accused of bias by one of the city's commissioners who had been vocal in opposition to her report.
(excerpt)
Commissioner Randy Leonard accused Luna-Firebaugh of allowing her "bias" to taint the study and said if he had known her slant, he never would have approved her $60,000 contract. "I feel a little bit like you're preaching to us," he said.
It sounds like Leonard wanted to hire someone who would merely stamp the agenda set by people like him. Perhaps he felt the $60,000 would have been better invested if Luna-Firebaugh had been up at the podium telling the city that it was doing a great job with both the Independent Police Review and the Citizen Review Committee. But then again, if that were true, why would the subject come up for paying someone from outside the city to do a review in the first place?
Some have said that a conflict between the city auditor and the mayor, both elected positions, over among other things the role of the IPR was what led to the decision to hire Luna-Firebaugh in the first place. The IPR recently was recent removed at least on a temporary basis from the control of the auditor's office and placed under Mayor Tom Potter by Potter. So clearly, there are some political fireworks on display as well. Perhaps when the smoke clears, it will become clear whether or not the IPR and CRC have any allies at City Hall or not.
And then there's the city's auditor, Gary Blackmer who has blasted publicly and in other places everything in the report including the decision of Luna-Firebaugh to attend some community forums sponsored by "those people". Meaning community members who were well-versed on the issue of civilian review in Portland in general and the roles of the IPR and CRC in particular but weren't interested or morally able to jump on the city's bandwagon, perhaps because they knew what was really going on and wanted no part of it.
Much to Blackmer's dismay of course.
It's not too difficult to figure out who in Riverside has the most common with Blackmer. After all, who were the individuals again who believed that if the executive director of the civilian oversight mechanism in Riverside attended community meetings that meant he was "biased" or created a perception of bias against police?
Potter has no counterpart in this city, because at least Potter doesn't appear to be afraid or feel politically threatened by critics of both the civilian mechanism or the PPB which he himself once helmed. There's no such person currently at City Hall in Riverside who wants to be surrounded or reinforced by anyone but those who think exactly the same way they do. If there are any, they certainly haven't stepped forward.
One reason why there's a huge disconnect between City Hall and the community and perhaps why there's a large disconnect between City Hall and employment unions as well during issues that impact them.
But Blackmer did respond, again.
(excerpt)
City Auditor Gary Blackmer, who oversees the Independent Police Review Division, said he'll consider any suggestions on improving the system but said he believes the best way to spur change in the Police Bureau is from within the organization, not from an "outside body."
Oh if that were true! If law enforcement agencies from California to New York and back again didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming into reform, most often by outside agencies who threaten to sue the cities and counties who hold the purses of these law enforcement agencies. For every city official or even police official who said that only those on the inside can spur change, there's an agency which needs a serious outside push for change. Even police chiefs who have pushed for change have been able to be more effective at it or perhaps even felt emboldened to do it when mandated to do so by outside agencies, which then can become the "bad guys" leaving the police chief off the hook and also employed for at least a period of time.
Why is it proven to be almost impossible to institute change from within? Because the "status quo" culture is so strong in law enforcement agencies that anyone in there who does buck the tide and push for change will be shown the door so fast their head will spin. That's what usually happens unless the particular leader of change has built in job protection and security. Otherwise, it's a revolving door that doesn't stop, revolving. In Riverside's Orange Street Station, it took a long time before the name of the chief would even be painted on the glass of the front door. The current police chief has been in place for nearly eight years but his three predecessors were all shown the door, some of them with only several years at the helm under their belt. Don't pass Go before you leave, don't collect $200 (but intead, a hefty retirement package).
But up in Portland, it's fairly clear exactly what Blackmer wants and that's a public relations tool to smooth down relations between the PPB and the community, which goes along lines with other city employees in other cities who have said that they believe that civilian review mechanisms should merely serve as a "buffer" between the police departments and the communities they serve. Which is why Blackmer probably should be the last person to oversee the IPR but don't be surprised if he gets his "toy" back when the din dies down.
The community members who appeared at the workshop asked for what most community members ask for if they are indeed asked, and what they often ask for is a mechanism to be more involved in the process and increased transparency of that process. Will they get either or both? Probably not, until the push for increased accountability in the available civilian review mechanism picks up in earnest probably when a particularly serious and controversial critical incident happens that galvanizes the public. Then the community will look back at what it has (just as the residents of Riverside looked back at LEPAC after Tyisha Miller) and will push harder for something stronger as has happened in other places. In fact, this chain of events is a very common one in most places that institute civilian review or institute stronger civilian review than what is currently in place.
Portland won't institute these changes on its own, because its interests including fiscal and those tied in with such issues as civil liability and risk management lie elsewhere and often in opposition to civilian review. That's another reason why you get comments about "outside agency" thrown out by people like Blackmer.
As for "low morale", yes, staffing can play a huge role in causing that as happened in Riverside in the late 1990s even before the incident that led to the implementations that led to reform were instituted (which itself led to claims of "low morale" and a massive turnover in the department's ranks). But challenging the culture inside a police department can also apparently cause a morale drop as well.
But maybe the union president of the PPB, Robert King, should also consider the fact that maybe it's the serious problems in the PPB that also contribute to the state of morale among officers who might not raise these issues for risk of ostracism by either the union or the management. There's long been a push to reform that police department by community members and organizations in Portland. But from inside, has there been anything at all?
Luna-Firebaugh had been criticized for only speaking to King for five minutes during her investigation but as it turned out, it was King who only wanted to discuss the issue for that amount of time before hanging up and saying that there was no need for a meet and greet and he'd read the report when it came out. That's his prerogative if that's how he sees fit to represent the PPB's officers but it's disingenuous for city officials to then claim that it was Luna-Firebaugh who wasn't interested due to "bias" without acknowledging King's own bias against civilian oversight mechanisms which is shared by nearly every law enforcement union leader in the country not to mention most police chiefs of law enforcement agencies as well.
Curious, I contacted members of several community organizations in Portland which address these issues through contact information provided online and had interesting discussions with them, as we discussed parallels between the processes impacting civilian review both in Portland and Riverside. One belief that runs strong in communities both in Portland and Riverside is that the cities encharged with implementing civilian review are much more concerned about having the appearance of an oversight process rather than the reality of having one. That's become especially apparent in Riverside during the past two years since the day the CPRC shocked the city out of its ennui and voted to sustain a finding of excessive force in the fatal shooting of Summer Marie Lane.
That whole entire and lengthy investigative, review, deliberation and decision process has essentially been reduced by the city (including those who didn't witness any of the process undergone by the commissioners at all) to the failure of the commission to have City Attorney Gregory Priamos or his designee in attendance while it was all going on. It's very doubtful that Priamos being there would have changed that finding unless he involved himself in the process in an inappropriate matter according to his own job description and mission statement of his office which wasn't likely to happen, was it? The only thing that would likely have changed the CPRC's finding would be to change the circumstances of the particular shooting which was the focus of the finding and that can't be done. The versions can be changed somewhat as was the case in Lane when the version of the shooting provided to the CPRC on Dec. 22, 2004 of that shooting by the department didn't quite match the version provided in several interdepartmental memos among members of the Officer-Involved Death Team which were included in the public investigation report which detailed a different chain of events just before and including the actual shooting.
What happened is that the commissioners and the police department had a difference of opinion on the finding for that particular shooting, a rarity indeed but it did happen that time. It was a moment which clearly defined the CPRC as it stood at that point and define it, it did as well as the players pulling its strings. Because the city officials and police department were ill-prepared to deal with a differential finding when it actually happened.
The city manager rather than making the final call simply deferred it to the police chief, according to his declaration that he provided in Ryan Wilson v the City of Riverside. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. Yet the city still believes a different outcome would have taken place if the city attorney were present as if the sustained finding could have been erased or prevented.
What would have happened is that it's likely the commission would have worded one single sentence in its public report on the Lane shooting better, which would have then sent the city officials and police department off looking for some other reason to hang the CPRC's finding on because when push came to shove, the city couldn't handle a differential finding on an officer-involved death at all. It was a revealing look at how far this city's really come since 1999 at least in this area, not because the city ultimately decided not to back the finding but because the city didn't even back the process. But wait a minute, there isn't even a process!
That would have been an interesting exercise to witness indeed. It probably still will be as it continues to play out.
What it shows is that the city's officials and police department management perhaps are very displeased that the CPRC has this power of investigation and review of officer-involved deaths at all, a power it was given before most of the current employees in these respective city departments were even in place. They had no say in the original language of the ordinance which created the CPRC in 2000 and no say in the language that is now included in the city's charter.
The city in the past two years has never stopped in trying to undermine and weaken that power with the objective of rendering it useless, even as it is currently paying out settlements and verdicts in relation to at least three and perhaps as many as five officer-involved deaths since 2004. The fact that the latest three fatal shootings are being reviewed by the CPRC so long after they took place is testament to this ongoing issue.
Where as it used to be difficult for individuals to find attorneys to represent them in lawsuits against the department for wrongful death and excessive force cases, those days are in the past at least for now. Even as attorneys in Riverside have with only one notable exception not been interested in stirring the waters, several major law firms in other counties have sat up, taken notice and are paying attention to what's going on with the Riverside Police Department and how its officers use force. Like sharks, they smell blood and as long as the city keeps chumming the waters with hefty settlements, that attention and interest will likely continue to grow.
That's echoed somewhat by a civil rights lawyer in Portland that said that he believed more accountability and justice could be obtained through suing the city. But few lawsuits which are paid out quietly through settlements actually result in serious change, though if a trend occurs when a series of them are paid out at once, it is as one person told me, certainly "revealing".
What was interesting is that when we also discussed the composition of our respective commissions, the Community Police Review Commission in Riverside and the Citizen Review Committee in Portland, one of them asked me, "where are the community members". And that wasn't a joke. And it's not the first time an outside party has made that observation after hearing about the composition of the CPRC.
This reference of course was in response to the dearth of representation on the CPRC when it comes to individuals who aren't current or past law enforcement officers or those with familial or work ties to the Riverside Police Department. That point was raised by the current chair, Brian Pearcy (who managed to be reelected for a second term even without being present for the election) at the CPRC's (almost) annual report to the city council.
Apparently for all its shortcomings, the CRC is at least more diverse in terms of the backgrounds represented by its membership. With the CPRC, you had the experience of having complaints investigated by police investigating their own and then removed by people with the majority of them being essentially one degree removed, perhaps?
The most disappointing comment by a commissioner on this issue were those who said they were no "qualified" Latino applicants. And they knew this how? Because the commission is nearly all White? There were Latinos, both male and female, with qualifications of community involvement that some of the current commissioners don't match and they just were passed over by the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee. At one point, the CPRC actually had five commissioners who were Latino, but one termed out and three resigned mid-term within a nine month period.
But back to Leonard. Despite his rant about Luna-Firebaugh being "an advocate", he admitted that he pretty much agreed with nearly everything in her report. So who is he trying to impress?
Luna-Firebaugh had this to say in response.
(excerpt, Portland Mercury)
Luna-Firebaugh defended her report, saying: “I am not biased against police. I come from generations of law enforcement. I am biased, however, in the idea that there should be a review board of empowered citizens that sits in the middle of police and government.”
Good answer. More to come from Portland for sure.
As part of its budget cuts, the Alvord School District in Riverside will be cutting two campus safety officer positions.
San Bernardino's police department is going to equip all of its officers with X26 tasers to the tune of $130,000.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
"In the past we just didn't have the equipment, and the chief saw that as something that needed to be corrected," Paterson said of Chief Michael Billdt's efforts to purchase the new stun guns.
Most of the homeless people who lived in Ontario's tent city are gone. Ontario first extended its arms open wide to homeless people of course bragging about it and then it criminalized them. All within about a month.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
A homeless advocacy group and some camp residents criticized the screening as unfair.
"Everybody was basically broken and scared to death through this three-day process," Mike Dunlap, founder of Homeless We Care, said Friday.
The large police presence during the screening intimidated some homeless, who left of their own accord, he said. Some did not have ready access to documentation and were disqualified, Dunlap said.
Michael John Archibald, 49, who has been living at the camp for a month, said he has a bank account, a YMCA membership and a job in Ontario but did not meet the city's criteria to stay. He said he has no other option but to live on the street.
"There are a lot of people like me who are using this as a breather, a place to get back together," Archibald said. "Now, they are pulling the rug out from under them."
Roderick Cooley, 46, who has been at the camp three months, said he can't stay because he couldn't get a document notarized showing that he had been renting a room in Ontario before he became homeless. He said he doesn't know where he will go now.
The head of Chicago's police department, Jody Weis, laid out core values for the employees of that department.
They are the following:
professionalism
obligation
leadership
integrity
courage
excellence
(excerpt, Chicago Tribune)
These core values are on display by many police officers everyday," Weis said in a statement. "But we want to ensure that every police officer knows, accepts and displays the tenets that define what a Chicago police officer should be."
The values statement will be taught to new recruits at the training academy and given to officers at roll calls and at police stations.
Weis, an ex-federal employee was hired by the city to take over the reins of a deeply troubled police agency that's been the center of many a scandal since the 1970s.
A series of excessive force incidents done by police officers on and off-duty which were captured on videotape ousted the last police chief.
Rumor of the week: The latest one is that Riverside City Hall will be cutting employment positions. Hopefully, this is just a rumor but it's important to keep a close eye on what's going on in this year's budget process.
---Eileen Luna-Firebaugh, before the Portland City Council
In Portland, the controversy that has erupted since the release of a report by consultant, Eileen Luna-Firebaugh continued as the city government met to discuss her proposed recommendations, according to The Oregonian which she finally presented to it and community residents in person.
After everyone left to go outside after the meeting, they were met by a long line of Portland Police Bureau officers dressed up in riot gear who began pepper spraying people who were gathered for a demonstration on the day of the fifth anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.
(excerpt)
Deputy city attorney Dave Woboril provided on-the-ground advice to police commanders, as observers from the American Civil Liberties Union and staff from the mayor's and several commissioners' offices stood by and watched the conflict.
"This is the Portland police," an officer blared on a bullhorn, as several police horses moved closer to the crowd and bike officers tried to press the group onto the sidewalk at Southwest Fifth Avenue and Jefferson Street at 1:35 p.m. "You are impeding traffic. Step out of the street, or you will be arrested."
They watched as one officer fired pepper spray into the crowd, which by then had mostly moved to the sidewalk outside the Wells Fargo bank building's entrance. Passers-by flashed cell phone photos of the afternoon confrontation, what appeared to be the only major clash during the anti-war march. One arrest was made.
What was going on inside the chamber was only slightly less combative. Luna-Firebaugh had returned to Oregon to give her presentation to the city government and held fast even after being accused of bias by one of the city's commissioners who had been vocal in opposition to her report.
(excerpt)
Commissioner Randy Leonard accused Luna-Firebaugh of allowing her "bias" to taint the study and said if he had known her slant, he never would have approved her $60,000 contract. "I feel a little bit like you're preaching to us," he said.
It sounds like Leonard wanted to hire someone who would merely stamp the agenda set by people like him. Perhaps he felt the $60,000 would have been better invested if Luna-Firebaugh had been up at the podium telling the city that it was doing a great job with both the Independent Police Review and the Citizen Review Committee. But then again, if that were true, why would the subject come up for paying someone from outside the city to do a review in the first place?
Some have said that a conflict between the city auditor and the mayor, both elected positions, over among other things the role of the IPR was what led to the decision to hire Luna-Firebaugh in the first place. The IPR recently was recent removed at least on a temporary basis from the control of the auditor's office and placed under Mayor Tom Potter by Potter. So clearly, there are some political fireworks on display as well. Perhaps when the smoke clears, it will become clear whether or not the IPR and CRC have any allies at City Hall or not.
And then there's the city's auditor, Gary Blackmer who has blasted publicly and in other places everything in the report including the decision of Luna-Firebaugh to attend some community forums sponsored by "those people". Meaning community members who were well-versed on the issue of civilian review in Portland in general and the roles of the IPR and CRC in particular but weren't interested or morally able to jump on the city's bandwagon, perhaps because they knew what was really going on and wanted no part of it.
Much to Blackmer's dismay of course.
It's not too difficult to figure out who in Riverside has the most common with Blackmer. After all, who were the individuals again who believed that if the executive director of the civilian oversight mechanism in Riverside attended community meetings that meant he was "biased" or created a perception of bias against police?
Potter has no counterpart in this city, because at least Potter doesn't appear to be afraid or feel politically threatened by critics of both the civilian mechanism or the PPB which he himself once helmed. There's no such person currently at City Hall in Riverside who wants to be surrounded or reinforced by anyone but those who think exactly the same way they do. If there are any, they certainly haven't stepped forward.
One reason why there's a huge disconnect between City Hall and the community and perhaps why there's a large disconnect between City Hall and employment unions as well during issues that impact them.
But Blackmer did respond, again.
(excerpt)
City Auditor Gary Blackmer, who oversees the Independent Police Review Division, said he'll consider any suggestions on improving the system but said he believes the best way to spur change in the Police Bureau is from within the organization, not from an "outside body."
Oh if that were true! If law enforcement agencies from California to New York and back again didn't have to be dragged kicking and screaming into reform, most often by outside agencies who threaten to sue the cities and counties who hold the purses of these law enforcement agencies. For every city official or even police official who said that only those on the inside can spur change, there's an agency which needs a serious outside push for change. Even police chiefs who have pushed for change have been able to be more effective at it or perhaps even felt emboldened to do it when mandated to do so by outside agencies, which then can become the "bad guys" leaving the police chief off the hook and also employed for at least a period of time.
Why is it proven to be almost impossible to institute change from within? Because the "status quo" culture is so strong in law enforcement agencies that anyone in there who does buck the tide and push for change will be shown the door so fast their head will spin. That's what usually happens unless the particular leader of change has built in job protection and security. Otherwise, it's a revolving door that doesn't stop, revolving. In Riverside's Orange Street Station, it took a long time before the name of the chief would even be painted on the glass of the front door. The current police chief has been in place for nearly eight years but his three predecessors were all shown the door, some of them with only several years at the helm under their belt. Don't pass Go before you leave, don't collect $200 (but intead, a hefty retirement package).
But up in Portland, it's fairly clear exactly what Blackmer wants and that's a public relations tool to smooth down relations between the PPB and the community, which goes along lines with other city employees in other cities who have said that they believe that civilian review mechanisms should merely serve as a "buffer" between the police departments and the communities they serve. Which is why Blackmer probably should be the last person to oversee the IPR but don't be surprised if he gets his "toy" back when the din dies down.
The community members who appeared at the workshop asked for what most community members ask for if they are indeed asked, and what they often ask for is a mechanism to be more involved in the process and increased transparency of that process. Will they get either or both? Probably not, until the push for increased accountability in the available civilian review mechanism picks up in earnest probably when a particularly serious and controversial critical incident happens that galvanizes the public. Then the community will look back at what it has (just as the residents of Riverside looked back at LEPAC after Tyisha Miller) and will push harder for something stronger as has happened in other places. In fact, this chain of events is a very common one in most places that institute civilian review or institute stronger civilian review than what is currently in place.
Portland won't institute these changes on its own, because its interests including fiscal and those tied in with such issues as civil liability and risk management lie elsewhere and often in opposition to civilian review. That's another reason why you get comments about "outside agency" thrown out by people like Blackmer.
As for "low morale", yes, staffing can play a huge role in causing that as happened in Riverside in the late 1990s even before the incident that led to the implementations that led to reform were instituted (which itself led to claims of "low morale" and a massive turnover in the department's ranks). But challenging the culture inside a police department can also apparently cause a morale drop as well.
But maybe the union president of the PPB, Robert King, should also consider the fact that maybe it's the serious problems in the PPB that also contribute to the state of morale among officers who might not raise these issues for risk of ostracism by either the union or the management. There's long been a push to reform that police department by community members and organizations in Portland. But from inside, has there been anything at all?
Luna-Firebaugh had been criticized for only speaking to King for five minutes during her investigation but as it turned out, it was King who only wanted to discuss the issue for that amount of time before hanging up and saying that there was no need for a meet and greet and he'd read the report when it came out. That's his prerogative if that's how he sees fit to represent the PPB's officers but it's disingenuous for city officials to then claim that it was Luna-Firebaugh who wasn't interested due to "bias" without acknowledging King's own bias against civilian oversight mechanisms which is shared by nearly every law enforcement union leader in the country not to mention most police chiefs of law enforcement agencies as well.
Curious, I contacted members of several community organizations in Portland which address these issues through contact information provided online and had interesting discussions with them, as we discussed parallels between the processes impacting civilian review both in Portland and Riverside. One belief that runs strong in communities both in Portland and Riverside is that the cities encharged with implementing civilian review are much more concerned about having the appearance of an oversight process rather than the reality of having one. That's become especially apparent in Riverside during the past two years since the day the CPRC shocked the city out of its ennui and voted to sustain a finding of excessive force in the fatal shooting of Summer Marie Lane.
That whole entire and lengthy investigative, review, deliberation and decision process has essentially been reduced by the city (including those who didn't witness any of the process undergone by the commissioners at all) to the failure of the commission to have City Attorney Gregory Priamos or his designee in attendance while it was all going on. It's very doubtful that Priamos being there would have changed that finding unless he involved himself in the process in an inappropriate matter according to his own job description and mission statement of his office which wasn't likely to happen, was it? The only thing that would likely have changed the CPRC's finding would be to change the circumstances of the particular shooting which was the focus of the finding and that can't be done. The versions can be changed somewhat as was the case in Lane when the version of the shooting provided to the CPRC on Dec. 22, 2004 of that shooting by the department didn't quite match the version provided in several interdepartmental memos among members of the Officer-Involved Death Team which were included in the public investigation report which detailed a different chain of events just before and including the actual shooting.
What happened is that the commissioners and the police department had a difference of opinion on the finding for that particular shooting, a rarity indeed but it did happen that time. It was a moment which clearly defined the CPRC as it stood at that point and define it, it did as well as the players pulling its strings. Because the city officials and police department were ill-prepared to deal with a differential finding when it actually happened.
The city manager rather than making the final call simply deferred it to the police chief, according to his declaration that he provided in Ryan Wilson v the City of Riverside. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. Yet the city still believes a different outcome would have taken place if the city attorney were present as if the sustained finding could have been erased or prevented.
What would have happened is that it's likely the commission would have worded one single sentence in its public report on the Lane shooting better, which would have then sent the city officials and police department off looking for some other reason to hang the CPRC's finding on because when push came to shove, the city couldn't handle a differential finding on an officer-involved death at all. It was a revealing look at how far this city's really come since 1999 at least in this area, not because the city ultimately decided not to back the finding but because the city didn't even back the process. But wait a minute, there isn't even a process!
That would have been an interesting exercise to witness indeed. It probably still will be as it continues to play out.
What it shows is that the city's officials and police department management perhaps are very displeased that the CPRC has this power of investigation and review of officer-involved deaths at all, a power it was given before most of the current employees in these respective city departments were even in place. They had no say in the original language of the ordinance which created the CPRC in 2000 and no say in the language that is now included in the city's charter.
The city in the past two years has never stopped in trying to undermine and weaken that power with the objective of rendering it useless, even as it is currently paying out settlements and verdicts in relation to at least three and perhaps as many as five officer-involved deaths since 2004. The fact that the latest three fatal shootings are being reviewed by the CPRC so long after they took place is testament to this ongoing issue.
Where as it used to be difficult for individuals to find attorneys to represent them in lawsuits against the department for wrongful death and excessive force cases, those days are in the past at least for now. Even as attorneys in Riverside have with only one notable exception not been interested in stirring the waters, several major law firms in other counties have sat up, taken notice and are paying attention to what's going on with the Riverside Police Department and how its officers use force. Like sharks, they smell blood and as long as the city keeps chumming the waters with hefty settlements, that attention and interest will likely continue to grow.
That's echoed somewhat by a civil rights lawyer in Portland that said that he believed more accountability and justice could be obtained through suing the city. But few lawsuits which are paid out quietly through settlements actually result in serious change, though if a trend occurs when a series of them are paid out at once, it is as one person told me, certainly "revealing".
What was interesting is that when we also discussed the composition of our respective commissions, the Community Police Review Commission in Riverside and the Citizen Review Committee in Portland, one of them asked me, "where are the community members". And that wasn't a joke. And it's not the first time an outside party has made that observation after hearing about the composition of the CPRC.
This reference of course was in response to the dearth of representation on the CPRC when it comes to individuals who aren't current or past law enforcement officers or those with familial or work ties to the Riverside Police Department. That point was raised by the current chair, Brian Pearcy (who managed to be reelected for a second term even without being present for the election) at the CPRC's (almost) annual report to the city council.
Apparently for all its shortcomings, the CRC is at least more diverse in terms of the backgrounds represented by its membership. With the CPRC, you had the experience of having complaints investigated by police investigating their own and then removed by people with the majority of them being essentially one degree removed, perhaps?
The most disappointing comment by a commissioner on this issue were those who said they were no "qualified" Latino applicants. And they knew this how? Because the commission is nearly all White? There were Latinos, both male and female, with qualifications of community involvement that some of the current commissioners don't match and they just were passed over by the Mayor's Nomination and Screening Committee. At one point, the CPRC actually had five commissioners who were Latino, but one termed out and three resigned mid-term within a nine month period.
But back to Leonard. Despite his rant about Luna-Firebaugh being "an advocate", he admitted that he pretty much agreed with nearly everything in her report. So who is he trying to impress?
Luna-Firebaugh had this to say in response.
(excerpt, Portland Mercury)
Luna-Firebaugh defended her report, saying: “I am not biased against police. I come from generations of law enforcement. I am biased, however, in the idea that there should be a review board of empowered citizens that sits in the middle of police and government.”
Good answer. More to come from Portland for sure.
As part of its budget cuts, the Alvord School District in Riverside will be cutting two campus safety officer positions.
San Bernardino's police department is going to equip all of its officers with X26 tasers to the tune of $130,000.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
"In the past we just didn't have the equipment, and the chief saw that as something that needed to be corrected," Paterson said of Chief Michael Billdt's efforts to purchase the new stun guns.
Most of the homeless people who lived in Ontario's tent city are gone. Ontario first extended its arms open wide to homeless people of course bragging about it and then it criminalized them. All within about a month.
(excerpt, Press Enterprise)
A homeless advocacy group and some camp residents criticized the screening as unfair.
"Everybody was basically broken and scared to death through this three-day process," Mike Dunlap, founder of Homeless We Care, said Friday.
The large police presence during the screening intimidated some homeless, who left of their own accord, he said. Some did not have ready access to documentation and were disqualified, Dunlap said.
Michael John Archibald, 49, who has been living at the camp for a month, said he has a bank account, a YMCA membership and a job in Ontario but did not meet the city's criteria to stay. He said he has no other option but to live on the street.
"There are a lot of people like me who are using this as a breather, a place to get back together," Archibald said. "Now, they are pulling the rug out from under them."
Roderick Cooley, 46, who has been at the camp three months, said he can't stay because he couldn't get a document notarized showing that he had been renting a room in Ontario before he became homeless. He said he doesn't know where he will go now.
The head of Chicago's police department, Jody Weis, laid out core values for the employees of that department.
They are the following:
professionalism
obligation
leadership
integrity
courage
excellence
(excerpt, Chicago Tribune)
These core values are on display by many police officers everyday," Weis said in a statement. "But we want to ensure that every police officer knows, accepts and displays the tenets that define what a Chicago police officer should be."
The values statement will be taught to new recruits at the training academy and given to officers at roll calls and at police stations.
Weis, an ex-federal employee was hired by the city to take over the reins of a deeply troubled police agency that's been the center of many a scandal since the 1970s.
A series of excessive force incidents done by police officers on and off-duty which were captured on videotape ousted the last police chief.
Rumor of the week: The latest one is that Riverside City Hall will be cutting employment positions. Hopefully, this is just a rumor but it's important to keep a close eye on what's going on in this year's budget process.
Labels: Backlash against civilian oversight, Making the grade, public forums in all places
posted by Five Before Midnight | 7:55 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home