Your Move

Groups Urge City to Move Swiftly to Challenge “Illegitimate” Ruling Stripping Powers from Spokane Police Ombudsman.

The Center for Justice and two prominent citizen organizations are calling upon Spokane city leaders to move swiftly to challenge an arbitrator’s decision, earlier this month, that would essentially gut Spokane’s Office of Police Ombudsman if left unchallenged.

“This is not a complicated issue,” said Center for Justice Communications Director Tim Connor. “As the arbitrator frankly acknowledged in his own decision, it was simply not appropriate for him to be making the call on whether the powers given the Ombudsman in the 2010 ordinance violated the state’s collective bargaining law for public employees. That decision should have been made by the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) with whom the complaint was filed in the first place. The arbitrator’s decision was illegitimate and the City needs to challenge it, the sooner the better.”

The Center for Justice, VOICES and the Peace & Justice Action League of Spokane (PJALS) are three of the several citizen organizations who urged city leaders to put in place a credible, independent office of police oversight. The citizen movement came in the wake of several high profile incidents (including the death of an innocent man, Otto Zehm, in 2006 at the hands of Spokane police) where the use of force by Spokane police officers has been called into question.

“This is a crucial test for city leaders,” says PJALS Executive Director Liz Moore. “Frankly, all eyes are on the Mayor, the Council, and the City Attorney to see whether they will take the steps they need to take to defend a reform that Spokane citizens have repeatedly demanded. It’s not just the credibility of the Ombudsman that’s at stake, it’s the credibility of city leaders as well.”

Although the City created an Office of Police Ombudsman in 2008 (and filled the position with current Ombudsman Tim Burns) it wasn’t until last June that the City Council adopted an ordinance that gave the OPO the powers to independently investigate complaints and file “closing reports” publicly disclosing the OPO’s findings and conclusions on specific citizen complaints.

“This issue is crucially important to the people of Spokane and to the question of whether we live in a democracy or a police state,” said Kiondra Bullock, executive Director of VOICES. “Without the independence provided the Ombudsman with last year’s ordinance, the office is not going to be credible and we’re going to lose this hard fought opportunity to begin rebuilding public trust in the Spokane Police Department.”

The Spokane Police Guild filed an Unfair Labor Practices Complaint with the PERC last August, alleging that the new ordinance violated the Guild’s collective bargaining agreement with the City. Even though the 2010 ordinance is explicit that the Ombudsman cannot play a role in officer discipline, the Guild argued that the powers given the OPO to investigate and report effectively made the OPO part of the disciplinary process.

Without objection from the City, the PERC deferred the Guild’s grievance to an arbitrator last September. On July 11th, arbitrator Michael Beck published his opinion and voided the 2010 ordinance. Conspicuously though, Beck’s decision squarely noted that “the problem with PERC’s deferral in this case” is that the controversy required a “determination [that] is appropriately one that should be made by the PERC…”

In a letter delivered to City Attorney Howard Delaney yesterday, Center for Justice staff attorney Bonne Beavers cited Beck’s disclaimer and supported it with reference to state rules and case law.

“The [state] regulation required PERC to retain jurisdiction,” Beavers wrote, “and this is what the City must now insist upon.” Beavers pointed out that if the PERC properly retains jurisdiction over the issue, that the City would reserve its rights to appeal an adverse ruling in state courts.

In closing, Beavers urged the City to “take all necessary legal measures to secure this review [by the PERC], including meeting any applicable appeal deadlines, which may be as early as July 31, 2011.”