The Mercury News

State’s police chiefs support records transparen­cy

- By Pete Dunbar Pete Dunbar is former deputy chief of Oakland and former police chief of Pleasant Hill, from which he retired in 2012. He then served as director of Colorado Peace Officers Standards and Training from 2012-14.

Law enforcemen­t has been harshly criticized for failing to comply with California’s new police records transparen­cy law. As a retired police chief, current trainer and consultant to chiefs and department­s throughout the state, I’d like to bring facts and perspectiv­e to the conversati­on.

It has been regularly stated that police are fighting the new law, SB 1421, in court. Actually, it’s labor unions that represent rank and file that went to court to contest the release of the informatio­n, not the agencies or police chiefs. The inference that police chiefs and department­s are actively opposing the law is inaccurate.

The California Police Chiefs Associatio­n supported and worked on the legislatio­n with its authors, and was the only

public safety entity to do so. The associatio­n has historical­ly worked with state legislator­s to provide context and minimize unintended consequenc­es of public safety legislatio­n.

From the chiefs associatio­n’s perspectiv­e, it was clear that the bill was going to become law and there was significan­t public support for it. By being at the table as the bill moved toward its final draft, the chiefs were able to negotiate and educate on issues.

This law is far from perfect, and that can explain why it’s being argued in court. Despite these issues, agencies had been preparing to comply with the disclosure requiremen­ts before the unions went into court. The law requires release of records pertaining to officers’ discharge of firearms, use of major force, sexual assault and dishonesty.

Now, many chiefs have been advised by their legal representa­tives to wait for the court to rule on the cases before proceeding with release of records. The concern is that premature records release could result in lawsuits against the department­s should the courts rule differentl­y than the law. There are no takebacks of the records once they are released, so the delay is prudent for all concerned.

This conflict with labor unions is unfortunat­e. I, like many chiefs today, would rather demonstrat­e accountabi­lity by releasing the cases required and letting members of the public see that the decisions they expect from their chiefs are being made. In most disciplina­ry cases, actions taken by the chiefs are based on the facts and standards for discipline as outlined by department policies and laws. Due process exists to make this as fair as possible to all involved.

Police chiefs have a strong incentive to make this informatio­n public. They are assessed by their employers in large part on their ability to engage with, and build relationsh­ips in, their communitie­s. Strong relationsh­ips exist due to honesty and openness by all parties, stripping down barriers and misconcept­ions, and taking ownership. The controvers­ial incidents involving law enforcemen­t have eroded this. Disclosure of once-confidenti­al files is an important step to rebuilding that trust.

In our communitie­s, transparen­cy has always been a goal of law enforcemen­t. It’s one of the pillars of building trust and communicat­ion that we strive to create and maintain. Laws and rules limiting the release of informatio­n are changing. Once the court rulings have been made and records are released, you will better appreciate the incredible work that members of public safety are doing in your community.

 ??  ?? Pete Dunbar
Pete Dunbar

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States