Despite Misgivings, Spokane Council Unanimously Adopts Police Ombudsman Ordinance.
In what is either a “historic” step toward independent police oversight, or a major coup for Spokane’s police guild, the Spokane City Council voted unanimously Monday night to adopt a controversial ordinance
creating a new Office of Police Ombudsman. While the vote will create the office, the ordinance adopted was essentially pre-determined in private negotiations between city officials and the Spokane police guild. Among other weaknesses cited by critics, it does not confer any authority for the new office to actually conduct investigations independent of the Spokane Police Department’s internal affairs unit.
“The choice here,” said city councilman Richard Rush, “is not whether we are getting the best process, or the best ordinance to create the Office of Police Ombudsman. It’s whether we’re going to start now, and start up the learning curve, and have an effective office, or whether we’re going to start later and then get up on the learning curve. And for that reason, I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s best to start now.”
Rush, who a week ago had expressed reservations about parts of the ordinance, said he decided to support it after a long meeting with City Attorney Howard Delaney. With Delaney “educating me a little bit about this process,” Rush said, “I’ve come to appreciate the fact that we just either don’t have an ombudsman, or we do have an ombudsman” under the terms reached between the city and the guild earlier this year.
As he was each of the two previous council meetings, Delaney was on hand to explain the ordinance and how its terms were negotiated.
Literally within seconds after the council took up the measure Monday night, city councilman Mike Allen announced he had a “little heartburn” over the ombudsman selection process in the ordinance, and asked Delaney to respond to the question about whether the selection process was an issue governed by the city’s collective bargaining agreement with the police guild. Delaney’s answer provided the most insight, to date, on how the city negotiated the terms of the ordinance with the police union.
The City Attorney first conceded that there was nothing in the collective bargaining agreement “that compels us” to negotiate with the guild over the ombudsman selection process.
“But let me give it to you like this,” Delaney continued. “If I go to a bargaining unit in the middle of a contract period and I want to negotiate three things, a, b, and c, they have no obligation to negotiate those within the contract. So, let’s say that they’re willing to talk about that and they say, okay, we want to negotiate a, b, and c, and we’re willing to discuss that but we also have concerns about x, y, and z. And so, we’re willing to discuss from a bargaining unit perspective a, b, and c, which you’re interested in, but you’ve got to be willing to talk about x, y, and z, with us also. That’s how this provision [the selection process] came to be part of the negotiations, is [sic] it was the x, y, z portion in that the guild said we will discuss the other things that are subject to collective bargaining but we want to also discuss these. Hence, you can’t get to a, b, and c, from our perspective, that’s the city’s, unless we’re also willing to discuss x, y, and z, the things they[the guild] were interested in making part of that negotiation.”
What Delaney referred to as “a, b, and c” is obviously the very existence of the proposed ombudsman office–even one without the independent investigative authority that city consultant Sam Pailca recommended last year.
But just to get the guild to consider any ombudsman position at all, Delaney explained to Allen, the city agreed to a convoluted selection process. As outlined in the new ordinance, the selection process gives representatives of the Spokane Police Officers Guild and the Lieutenants and Captains Association what some would construe as effective veto power over who the ombudsman gets to be. Specifically, the ordinance would set up a five member selection committee. Two of the first four appointments to that committee would have to be members approved by police organizations, and then the first four would have to decide on who the fifth member would be.
The five member selection committee would then recommend three candidates for the position to the Mayor who would be obliged to nominate one of the three for confirmation to the City Council.
It was this process that Rush had balked at last week, and which Allen was raising concerns about Monday night. Allen, while still expressing discomfort with the selection process, said he would nevertheless support the ordinance after Delaney and Council President Joe Shogan, a lawyer, offered their opinions that if the council rejected the Mayor’s proposed choice, the process could be repeated with the selection committee sending an additional slate of acceptable candidates to the Mayor’s office.
“You know,” Allen said, “it’s not a perfect ordinance, but given some of the clarifications I have [gotten] tonight, I will support the ordinance.”
Councilman Steve Corker called the passage of the ordinance “a very important first step, and a program we’ll be very proud of in the years ahead and be very thankful that we took the first step tonight.”
Councilwoman Nancy McLaughlin also said she felt better about the final ordinance after amendments she proposed last week–one of which stripped term limits from the office, and another of which made clear that candidates could be sought with a national search–were adopted.
Both Shogan and Corker complimented the Center for Justice for providing a review and critique of the ordinance. But here it must be noted that none of the Center’s suggestions for selecting the police ombudsman or bolstering the independence of the office were included in the ordinance adopted by the council.
Moments after the vote was taken, Council President Shogan deemed it a “historic” moment for Spokane.
“This has been a long, hard process,” he said. “Now we have the very difficult task of finding somebody who would be the best possible male or female first police ombudsman in the City of Spokane. This is going to be a very difficult job and whoever holds the job the first time is going to set a tone and very well may determine the success or failure of this Office of Police Ombudsman. We will be monitoring, as all citizens will be, the operation of the office with a view toward making suggestions to making it better, through this year. There’s another negotiation with the guild coming up, for a contract, which will be an opportunity within the next year to make suggestions involving negotiations, should they occur.”