Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFresno Mayor Autry Supports Unpopular Police Auditor Plan
Fresno Mayor Autry Supports Unpopular Police Auditor Plan
By Mike Rhodes
Fresno Mayor Alan Autry is pushing a plan for an Independent Police Auditor (IPA) that is not supported by the City Council, the Fresno Police Officers Association, or the Central California Criminal Justice Committee. In a plan that seems to be taken directly out of Republican Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s ill fated strategy of putting unpopular ideas before the voters, mayor Autry says he will put the IPA issue on the June 2006 ballot. The mayor wants an IPA that is similar to the program in Sacramento. Gail Gaston, who is a member of the Human Relations Committee and works with the CCCJC said the mayor’s plan would not result in an "independent police auditor."
Speculation about why Autry would propose a version of the IPA that nobody seems to want falls into a couple of categories. One theory is that the mayor is making this proposal to undermine the CCCJC which was gearing up to put the issue on the 2006 ballot. The CCCJC brought the issue before the City Council twice already and were preparing to start a ballot initiative when they were contacted by H. Spees, a close political ally of the mayor, who said he wanted to work with them to pass the IPA. This led to the mayor’s proposal. Ellie Bluestein, an active member of the CCCJC, sent an email to supporters today saying "a third rejection of the proposal for an Independent Police Auditor would have been pretty disappointing. But an approval of Mayor Autry’s proposal based on the Sacramento model would have put into place a system that would not be effective, that would not guarantee an unpredjudiced, impartial office. To set up a system that would be geared for failure would not have been a victory. We have to use our time now to educate the city council and the community to the type of auditor system that would succeed in Fresno and if necessary bring it to the electorate for approval. So we have a lot of work ahead, and we’re not giving up. We need to make it clear that this proposal is not a condemnation of the police but an effort to enhance community trust and cooperation between the police and the public and to guarantee that all Fresnans are treated with respect and dignity."
The Fresno Police Officers Association thinks the proposal from the mayor for an IPA could be retaliation for the FPOA’s opposition to the November 8 ballot initiatives, which were strongly supported by Autry. The FPOA strongly opposes any IPA proposal.
A majority of City Council members have made it clear they oppose any version of an IPA proposal. Even Jerry Duncan, who is one of mayor Autry’s closest allies on the council, publically criticized the mayor’s IPA plan and warned him not to use city personnel to gather signatures for the initiative.
Mayor Autry has consistently supported the IPA concept and has brought the issue before the City Council on several occasions. But, it was never clear which IPA version the mayor supported. With the CCCJC beginning to organize a local effort to put a "San Jose" style IPA on the June ballot, Autry might have seen his proposal as a way of circumventing the CCCJC proposal. If the City Council had adopted his proposal last Tuesday (November 15, 2005), he would have won - a weak IPA would have been implemented. Since the proposal failed, the mayor can tell the community that he tried to pass an IPA and it was the City Council that voted against it. If the CCCJC moves ahead with their initiative for the June ballot, the mayor can put his proposal on the ballot too, creating a confusing situation for voters.
The CCCJC is hoping residents will become educated about the two IPA options and choose the version that has the best opportunity for holding the police accountable to the public. Information about the IPA proposal is available on their web site at: http://cccjc.org/home/ . They also have material comparing the two systems and copies of the proposal they are supporting available by calling (559) 485-4707
###
> put a "San Jose" style IPA on the June ballot
Can someone please explain what anyone sees in the San Jose auditor model that is worthy of emulation (anyone other than police, that is)?
After over 10 years of SJ auditor existence, fatal shootings by police are near record levels, and San Jose ranks #1, among the 50 largest US cities, in rate of fatal shootings by police relative to the overall murder rate. Fatal shootings spiked after Tasers were given to all police. While the killings have not gone down, police routinely use Tasers on people who are neither armed nor violent. SJPD Taser usage is blessed by the SJ auditor's office each year in its annual report.
It's no surprise that SJPD violence has escalated under the auditor's reign:
- The SJ auditor can sit in on questioning during the investigation phase but cannot question.
- The SJ auditor can recommend policy or procedure changes, but the recommendations are not binding.
- The SJ auditor does not discipline police and cannot appeal the chief's decisions.
Former ACLU Police Practices Project Director John Crew called the auditor model the weakest of all police oversight models. He pointed out that even if every officer in LAPD was interviewed following the Rodney King incident, and all stated that the officers involved in the incident acted correctly, the auditor system would be unable to change the finding.
The San Jose Auditor was established by the City Council, in defiance of popular demand for a true oversight board. Predictably, the auditor initially met with resistance from the former San Jose police chief and the police union, but received increasing support once the auditor's ineffectiveness was well established.
A ballot choice between Sacramento and San Jose-style auditors sounds a lot like the farcical choice between Democrat greedy murderers and Republican greedy murderers. When it's Jason vs. Freddy, winner kills us all. Such contests may serve as entertaining diversion, but no one serious about ending unchecked police atrocities will be amused.
We have learned that the issue of an Independent Auditor for the Fresno Police Department is on your agenda for November 15. This was a surprise to us because when Mayor Autry indicated that he would bring the matter before the public if the City Council did not agree to it we wrote to him asking for a meeting and have been calling ever since to set a date for such a meeting with no response from him.
We have met with each of you at least once, and several of you
expressed concern that the city council maintain some control over the office of Independent Auditor, which is not the case in the Sacramento model that the mayor is proposing. We too believe that the San Jose form of that office, which has the IPA reporting to the city council as well as to the mayor, guarantees a more independent and stronger IPA.
We had hoped to discuss this with the mayor and have prepared a careful comparison of the two plans so that you may see the difference between them. This item is important enough to warrant further discussion regarding the form it should take as well as the funding needed in order for it to be a successful and effective office.
Recent events have stressed the need for better fiscal management of cases involving excessive use of force. The Celdon case is a clear example of that.
Complaints by police officers against use of excessive force or
improper procedures by other officers clearly indicates a need for
impartial oversight of such complaints.
Many lawsuits are pending against the police department and the city by people in the community complaining of use of excessive force and other lapses of department policy and procedures.
The Central California Criminal Justice Committee has been studying this issue for more than seven years. The cost of mounting a ballot initiative would be over $65,000. We believe that a joint meeting between the mayor, the city council, and a group from our organization could bring about a well crafted proposal for an IPA that would enhance the work of the Police Department and increase trust and confidence on the part of Fresno residents. We ask you to entertain this alternative at your meeting today and immediately set it in motion.
Very truly yours,
Central California Criminal Justice Committee
When Bubba first took office, he publicly said he did not want a Civilian Review Board looking at the city's police department; he said that, instead, he supported the concept of a IPA. But, he never went on record about which type of IPA he supported.
There've been rumors that he wanted a weak IPA, and one that reports to the City Manager would be essentially toothless. The city manager would have the option to quietly bury any investigation that displeased him (or the mayor of the moment).
It's not exactly a secret that Bubba and the FPOA (the police union) have been at odds for months. His comments about the FPOA endangering public safety when they filed a unfair labor practice charge a few months ago set the tone. Add to that the FPOA's opposition to Arnold. The mayor made some statements right after the election about the state being the Titantic. He was less than pleased with the election outcome.
I see Bubba using dueling ballot measures, playing them off each other to confuse the voters so much that they vote 'no' on both, effectively killing the IPA.
He gets even with the FPOA.
And, he gets to say--'I tried, but the poeple spoke'--with 'no' votes.
Donate
$35.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.