By Antonio D. French
Filed Wednesday, April 12, 2006 at 5:49 PM
Two headlines on the Post-Dispatch's website today raise serious questions about the perspective of the paper's newsroom. Labels: Mayor, Media_Watch, Police
The first headline, "St. Louis Police Board approves plan for civilian review," leads readers to believe that "after about five years of community debate," the City's state-controlled police board finally caved in and created an independent board to investigate reports of police abuse. This is absolutely not the case.
Not only are the supporters of a CRB not satisfied with the police board's actions, but some have openly called for voters to punish Mayor Francis Slay for his veto of the compromise bill that took five years to finally be passed by the Board of Aldermen.
What's more, the Aldermanic Black Caucus has written a letter to Slay expressing their "deep disappointment" in his subsequent attempt to bypass the Board by submitting his own watered-down version of a CRB. It is that version that was approved today by the police commissioners.
The second misleading headline reads: "School board clashes with new member." The story is about last night's meeting of the Board during which new member Peter Downs offered three bold amendments to the agenda of the Board's next public meeting.
Two other members, Ron Jackson and Robert Archibald, voiced opposition on each of Downs' motions. Three other members (Board Pres. Veronica O'Brien, Bill Purdy and Donna Jones) supported Downs. The other member, Flint Fowler, was silent during the debate and voted with the descenters.
The Post would have its readers believe that two members constitute the entire Board and that that board "clashed" with the one of its members. The fact is that each of Downs' motions passed by a vote of 4-3, with a clear majority supporting him.
UPDATE: The Post has published a new story on the civilian review board. The new one, written by Bill Bryan, begins with: "The St. Louis Police Board voted Wednesday to create a civilian review panel under terms that disappointed activists who wanted it to have more independence."
Bryan's story does quote people on both sides of the issue, including activists Jamala Rogers and John Chasnoff; Redditt Hudson, of the ACLU; Mayor Francis Slay; Police Chief Joe Mokwa; and Police Board President Chris Goodson.
9 Comments:
Paul, I agree with you completely. I have criticized the STLPD in my blog numerous times because they are simply a suburban oriented news paper. They do not cover City news except for shootings and political 'scandals.'
Reading old articles at the library from the Globe Democrat and the STLPD, I can say with confidence that the STLPD has lost its relevance for City residents.
4/12/2006 7:49 PM
Carrying someone's water, the Post's Steve Giegerich writes:
"Williams was hired a year ago to turn around a district long plagued by violence, subpar academic achievement and budget woes. His reform efforts are viewed by many, including St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay, as critical to the city's revival."
That last sentence sounds suspiciously similar to a sentence that appears every time the Old Post Office reno/Century demo is written up in an even raggier rag, the Business Journal: "The project is considered critical to downtown's revival."
Never attributed, never backed up. Just plain critical. I wonder if Richard Callow gets a cookie every time that sentence appears in print.
4/12/2006 11:11 PM
How is the new CRB any different than the CRB finally passed in BB #69?
I thought Slay only vetoed BB #69 to disapprove of the bill's anti-police preamble. So then, doesn't Slay's executive order now approved by the police board otherwise mirror the CRB structure outlined in BB #69?
4/13/2006 8:31 AM
"It is pretty obvious that the Post Dispatch could care less about the citizens of the city of St. Louis and it is just looking to get a reaction out of people living in outlying areas."
NO KIDDING! This is made even more clear to me every time I pick up a Post, but the coverage of that recent very terrible storm that hit the area really brought it home to me. They covered county houses losing shingles and all manner of county damage, but two of the most important landmarks on the Near North Side sustained major, possibly fatal damage during the storm.... And I didn't see a peep out of the Post for days about it! They finally mentioned one of the buildings in passing, but the article focussed on the serial slumlord who owns it, not on the fate of the building itself. Glad to know they care about my neighborhood!
4/13/2006 10:48 AM
Are you kidding me?
From Antonio's article about the meeting:
Downs' last request was for the superintendent's office to make available to the public a line item report of all of the district's expenditures for this budget year. Williams and Jackson again said that they did not see the need for such a request.
Jackson said the majority of the public would never read such a long document.
What balls! "We don't need a public expenditure report, I mean, most folks woulden't want to sit through all of those dry numbers detailing the squander of their tax dollars" Jackson's got some real balls on him.
4/13/2006 11:20 AM
And as to the post, Bill McClellan is one of the few reasons left to ever pick up a copy...
4/13/2006 11:23 AM
If the CRB of Executive Order #38 mirrors the CRB of Board Bill #69, why is there poo-pooing from the Aldermanic Black Caucus and Coalition Against Police Crimes and Repression?
4/13/2006 4:07 PM
What is the part about the state controls the police department. I keep hearing that the police board is appointed by the governor and that is why Slay or the Board of Alderman have any control.
Is that true and if so why is there all this fighting over a CRB when everyone should be fighting for control over the police.
4/13/2006 9:21 PM
I think that the Mayor and the Board of Police Commissioners made an excellent decision about the CRB and were very generous in their willingness to develop such a board.
What I think too many people forget is some of the inherent problems with CRB's. Lay persons lack a sufficient understanding of police practices and operating conditions to knowledgeably perform a meaningful evaluation. This would be similar to an automobile mechanic being chosen to evaluate the work of a surgeon.
Civilian review boards are only rarely effective for a variety of reasons. Much like civil service boards, they tend to be populated by appointees of elected officials who may have agendas that are not consistent with the search for truth.
I want to provide an example of an effective Civilian Review Board, which appears similar to the one proposed by the Mayor and the Board of Police Commissioners here in St. Louis:
San Diego's oversight process is based in the assumption that the primary responsibility for policing police must lie within the police department itself. The Board's role is to ensure the police carry out their responsibility appropriately. The 23 member Board reviews and evaluates every Internal Affairs investigation of a Citizen's Complaint against a police officer. Each Internal Affairs investigation is assigned to a three person review team which does not close the case until that team is satisfied with the completeness and adequacy of the investigation. The case is then presented by the team to the full Board along with their recommendations for final disposal.
If there is a disagreement between Internal Affairs and the Board which can not be reconciled, it is taken to the City Manager for review and a final decision. If the Board is not satisfied with the Manager's decision it is empowered to refer the case to the District Attorney, Grand Jury or, if a civil rights issue is involved, the Federal Department of Justice. The process places pressure on the parties to resolve disagreements. Only three cases in the eight year history of the Board resulted in referrals to the Grand Jury or prosecutors for further investigation.
City-wide surveys indicate trust and satisfaction on the part of the public toward the police increased significantly during the eight years of history and experience with the Board. The citizens, police and city all feel that civilian oversight works to their advantage. Citizen access to and impact on the police department has increased. The police department feels that they are a better, more effective force because of the policy input and changes resulting from Board recommendations. The Police Department's efforts to institute city-wide Neighborhood Policing have been enhanced because of the increased confidence of the public. The Police Review Board is viewed as an invaluable management tool for the City Manager, a confidence-building tool for the public, and an efficiency-building tool for the police.
4/14/2006 1:12 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home