Police chiefs should support bill

March 5, 2008 by Mark Schlosberg, The Fresno Bee

This week, police chiefs from throughout California are gathering in Fresno for the annual meeting of the California Police Chiefs Association (Cal Chiefs). While Cal Chiefs serves as an important forum for law enforcement leaders to exchange best practices, build relationships and learn about trends in law enforcement, Cal Chiefs also takes positions on legislation and is currently opposing transparency and openness around police misconduct in a way that is contrary to the public interest.

Cal Chiefs is opposing SB 1019, a bill written by Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles. The bill would restore public access to information about police misconduct, which was made secret by the August 2006 California Supreme Court case Copley Press v. Superior Court.

In previous decades, several jurisdictions throughout the state, including those in San Diego, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Oakland, held public hearings and released information to the public about police misconduct complaints and discipline. After Copley, this information is closed to the public.

Unlike in cases of other public employees, doctors and lawyers, the public is now barred from learning about individual officers who have engaged in egregious misconduct, including use of excessive force or racial profiling. The public cannot learn if individual departments are taking these allegations seriously and meting out significant discipline for serious transgressions.

California is now among the most secretive states in the nation, behind such states as Texas, Florida and Ohio, all of which make public information about cases where officers have been disciplined for misconduct.

Transparency in this area is critical -- not just from a civil rights or good government perspective -- but from a public safety perspective. When a critical incident such as an officer-involved shooting occurs, tensions run high and the public often demands answers. If a police chief is unable to explain to the public how the situation is being handled and what the outcome is, allaying community concerns becomes difficult and public trust erodes.

Police depend greatly on public trust to perform their jobs. Cases cannot be solved, investigations cannot be completed and crimes will not be reported without community trust.

As East Palo Alto Police Chief Ron Davis wrote in supporting SB 1019, "As we face increasing crime and violence in our communities, we need to work in partnership with the community to develop long-term solutions. This cannot occur if the community, especially communities of color, believe the police operate in secrecy and with impunity."

Regrettably, as an organization, Cal Chiefs thus far has not shared this view. SB 1019 is a modest piece of legislation that would allow -- not mandate -- local jurisdictions to adopt procedures for release of information about police complaints and discipline at the level allowed prior to the Copley Press decision.

The bill has specific protections for officer safety and only allows public access after procedures are adopted by the local legislative authority. It is supported by a number of leading law enforcement officials, including Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton and Oakland Police Chief Wayne Tucker, along with a wide range of good government, media and civil rights organizations.

Rather than pursuing openness that would lead to greater public trust, Cal Chiefs has joined with the police unions in pursuing a series of unfounded arguments aimed at persuading the Legislature to oppose the measure.

In a letter opposing SB 1019, the organization claimed that the bill would jeopardize officer safety, despite the fact that not a single officer has been physically harmed as the result of misconduct information being released in the past 30 years.

Cal Chiefs claimed that the bill would erode privacy rights in personnel matters that apply "to all public employees," despite the fact that misconduct information is available for all other public employees except peace officers.

Cal Chiefs claimed that the bill would harm recruitment and retention efforts, again, without evidence.

We at the ACLU hope that these views do not represent the opinions of the majority of California police chiefs and urge Cal Chiefs to reconsider its opposition to SB 1019. Police chiefs should argue for an increased ability to share information with their communities as a means of increasing public trust and police-community relations.

Former Los Angeles Police Chief Bernard Parks put it best, when he wrote: "Secrecy around citizen complaints about police misconduct will only result in greater mistrust of the police, poor police-community relations and, ultimately, less responsive and accountable police agencies. SB 1019 presents a step in the right direction toward addressing the problems caused by the Copley Press decision."