A former cop himself, Seattle City Council member Tim Burgess has authored an essay about shifting the philosophy of the Seattle Police Department’s “values and foundational principles of Constitutional policing.” You should read the entire essay. It responds partly to the recent US Department of Justice report that accuses Seattle cops of violating the Constitution with regular acts of excessive force. Burgess also attempts to distance himself from the SPD’s malfeasance during his tenure as chair of the council’s Public Safety Committee. (To Burgess’s credit, his committee issued the most concrete and specific reform proposals to police brass in response to a rash of misconduct cases.)
What does Burgess suggest? Training overhauls and a carefully crafted program of management and oversight, for starters, along with stronger crime-tracking techniques. It’s a thoughtful essay. But Burgess reveals he hasn’t given up on his passion for civility laws that target poor people on the street (which could manifest in more of the sort of profiling that exacerbates the department’s existing problems with nonwhite suspects and the poor). Among other things, Burgess calls to “focus on the policing of those micro-places where crime is concentrated and anchored” and “strategies to prevent crime, especially street crime and disorder…” This harks back to Burgess’s 2010 effort to pass a bill to further penalize aggressive panhandling—a measure that failed after a mayoral veto. To the extent that Burgess, who has his eye on the mayor’s office, wants to repeat this element of his agenda, he’d be wise to focus on street disorder that constitutes actual crime (forucs on assaults, thefts, and other criminal activity), not street disorder that is merely annoying.
Burgess will make a great mayor and I look forward to supporting his run for the office with vigor.
If Dominic forms the left-most side of this “civility law” argument, Burgess hovers directly center. He is no Sidrian. He has never passed or enacted a law later found to be unconstitutional. He’s had some good ideas, some bad ideas, but so far he’s batting over .500.
Even Dominic can’t say the same for Mayor McGinn.
I think you mean Sidran.
Burgess is exactly right here. And this culture change needs to come from the top and go all the way down. You’ll be able to tell if it’s effective if something like five to ten percent of the force quit or retire because of it. I wonder what the percentage was in LAPD when they changed? Actually, what I’d like to see is the hapless tool Diaz replaced by someone from LAPD who was there during the change.
1. Civilian leadership appointed by the Council that answers to the Council. Only. Police answer to this Commissioner role who serves only at the pleasure of the public.
2. Civilian oversight/OPA that has final disciplinary say. They have full 100% access to anything in police records at all times. This is overseen by a board/committee who audits them. Each council member can nominate one person, and so can the mayor. 2 or 4 year terms. Council vote to approve members.
3. All police records/videos are kept more than 3 years, which is the statute of limitation for police actions apparently. 5 to 10 years.
4. Pass a law either through the Council OR citizen initiative that BARS the city from entering any new contract with SPOG that lacks points 1-3, and specifically note that the City, Council, Mayor, it’s agents, etc. are barred from removing said law, which can ONLY be removed, modified, terminated, or exempted by a majority vote of Seattle citizens.
I’d posit that the “merely annoying” stuff is far more important since most of us deal with it on a daily basis. While the bigger criminal activity is definitely worse for the person on the receiving end, it seems pretty rare in this city (at least in the useful bits of the CBD). Like litter, the annoying stuff probably isn’t going to hurt you, but it definitely tarnishes one’s romps through the urban landscape. It sucks that some corners of my hometown have basically been ceded to the “merely annoying.”
@4, that’s never going to happen. Answerable to the council? Not in any city in America, not in a million years. Especially cities like Seattle, where the Council has repeatedly proven that they are completely ineffectual when they are not clueless, or both. The idea that the Council is capable of managing a big-city police force is laughable. I mean, look at them.
All that is required is strong leadership from a chief who isn’t interested in any other answers besides “yes, sir”.
Burgess’ suggestions are all well and good, but they “stand apart from” any mention of the elephant in the room: SPD’s chronic pattern of civil rights violations, and its total lack of meaningful accountability for officers who violate department policy, use excessive force, make false arrests, and flat-out lie.
I’m far enough away from Seattle as an expat that my comments are not necessarily timely, but as an expat I may also have some directly relevant experience.
Civilian oversight is certainly a key, and that is direct contrast to oversight by the courts, and, for that matter, prosecutors, who place the interests of the profession above those of the public – in general – including the Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement process.
The 3 branch system of government is as relevant at the retail level of municipal governance as it is in the Federal Government. In both cases are legal system has utterly failed, and abusive violence is only one of the very compelling symptoms of this. This is a failure that also extends to our currently dominant legislative branch, and it would be appropriate to see some leadership therein step up to work with executive McGinn to solve this critical problem.