Problems with the BART police planBy Tim Redmond
The final draft of a civilian oversight plan for the BART police is headed for the full BART Board -- and while it’s a whole lot better than what we have now (and BART director Tom Radulovich praises it as "the second strongest police oversight system in the Bay Area"), there are some distinctly funky things about it that the board needs to revisit.
The proposal would create a police auditor, who would investigate complaints of BART Police misconduct and recommend discipline. The auditor would report to an 11-member civilian oversight board, with each of the nine BART directors appointing one member, the full BART board appointing an at-large member -- and the BART police unions appointing the final member.
That’s unprecedented, in my knowledge. I don’t think any police union anywhere in California gets to name a representative to the police oversight panel. That part of the plan has got to go.
The other problem: The final decision on discipline will be up to the BART Police chief -- and if the chief (as is highly likely) refuses ever to impose effective discipline, then the auditor will be stifled.
Yes, the auditor can appeal -- the the general manager, who hires the chief. Not much luck there. Beyond that, it would require a two-thirds vote of the civilian oversight board, AND a two-thirds vote of the entire BART Board, to overrule the chief and impose discipline on a cop.
That sort of supermajority requirement hasn’t worked very well at the state-budget level, and there’s a good reason: It means that a small minority (four of the 11 oversight board members, four of the nine BART Board members) can block any action.
And let’s face it -- the BART Board is not a bastion of progressive thought. Just getting a majority of those folks (or their appointees) ever to agree to crack down on police misconduct will be a tough job. Getting two-thirds of both bodies is going to be almost impossible.
And since state law pretty much mandates that all police disciplinary procedures are kept secret, there won’t be any public pressure in any individual cases.
Oddly enough, BART -- which is fighting bitterly to stop Assemblymember Tom Ammiano’s bill mandating tough police oversight and has got the measure bottled up -- now needs state legislation to make its weaker plan work. BART isn’t currently authorized to hold disciplinary hearings or impose discipline on rank-and-file employees. So this whole issue is going to come up before the state Legislature anyway.
Which means Ammiano will have a chance to push for stronger reforms. Perhaps he could offer a few amendments to the enabling legislation that BART is proposing.
And right now, Ammiano’s office isn’t in the mood to accept the current BART plan. “It’s as if the whole Oscar Grant thing never happened,” Quintin Mecke, Ammiano’s press spokesperson, told me.
digg •
del.icio.us •
sphere •
google
•
Comments (1)
Bad cops? You bet. See www.FamilyalwCourts.com/badcop.html
Personally, what about misogyny?
http://www.killerjudges.com/States.html
As California leads the nation in killing women and children, (see www.FamilyLawCourts.com/kids.html which I founded in 2001)
Judge Morgan put me over the top. Investigating her background today, I discovered Judge Morgan has been practicing a Zen philosophy for years and, as an earlier article highlighted, works hard to Not send people to jail. As such, Judge Morgan is not fit to preside over cases involving a danger to the public, as the Mitchell defendant earlier demonstrated he was. Judge Morgan is the reason Danielle Keller was beaten to death with a baseball bat. Judge Morgan did not issue a warrant including after Mitchell blew off his earlier, domestic violence hearing in her court.
http://www.elkinstaskforce.org/News.html
Clearly Judge Morgan represents a danger to the public and should not be in a position to cause further death or injury. She should be OFF the bench. However, given Justice Ronald George's track record, http://www.metnews.com/articles/zeli052102.htm and the U.S. Supreme Court, it's not likely.
The best the public can do however, if she does not resign, is boycott her court.
Make Judge Morgan's Courtroom as dark as the inside of Danielle Keller's casket.
Most sincerely,
Bonnie Russell
www.FamilyLawCourts.com
Posted by Bonnie Russell | July 19, 2009 07:33 PM