Union fighting APD’s new promotion policy

Officers call it a return to the ‘good ol’ boy’ system; chief says he needs discretion to promote the best

The union that represents Albuquerque police officers has accused the city of trying to bring back the “good ol’ boy” network for determining who gets promoted to sergeant.

The city, in turn, says it simply needs some discretion to ensure only the best officers move into leadership positions and should not be forced to promote those with significant disciplinary problems in their background.

The dispute is playing out in federal court. The union is asking U.S. District Judge Robert Brack — who oversees a settlement that requires a series of police reforms in Albuquerque — to schedule a hearing to consider its objections to the new promotion process.

It says the new promotion policy

too much power to decide who gets promoted.

Sergeants are frontline supervisors at APD, and their work is considered a key to addressing the “culture of aggression” found by the U.S. Department of Justice in a 2014 investigation.

To that end, a settlement agreement between the city of Albuquerque and the Justice Department requires APD to develop “fair” promotional practices that prioritize constitutional, community-oriented policing.

Under the old system, officers who passed a test got on a list and waited for an open sergeant’s position, with only certain exceptions, according to the city. That left APD executives with too little discretion over whom to promote, city officials say.

The new policy, which went into effect July 19, says:

Candidates must have “no disciplinary issues or patterns of complaints” going back two years, unless the complaint is unfounded or the officer is otherwise exonerated. Also, the issues or complaints can’t “indicate a lack of constitutional policing or lack of community policing or violations of civil rights.”

The chief can exclude a candidate for “just cause” for any incident going back five years and for an incident even older if it was particularly egregious. The candidate would have a chance to contest the chief’s decision, city attorneys say.

The debate

All of that is simply too vague, the police union argues. Instead, the city should have specific standards — like prohibiting someone from promotion if they’ve been suspended for two and half weeks for excessive force or found by a court to have violated someone’s civil rights.

The “policy provides the chief of police unbridled discretion to control the promotional process, which is tantamount to a return to the ‘good ol’ boy’ selection process that existed 30 years ago,” union attorney Frederick Mowrer said in a 14-page notice he filed in late August.

He argued that the policy will reward officers who work in jobs that limit public contact and, consequently, citizen complaints.

“What this policy does is promote people who are not willing to take the chance of being placed in a situation where possible discipline could occur because a mistake is made by the officer,” Mowrer said.

Police Chief Gorden Eden doesn’t see it that way.

“It is essential that we promote proven, exemplary, and committed leaders,” he said in a written statement to the Journal. “The department cannot accomplish true reform if it is required to promote supervisors with a history that raises questions about their ability to model constitutional and effective community policing for their officers.”

City executives see sergeants as critical to carrying out the reforms required under the Justice Department settlement. They’re the ones who ensure new policies and practices are carried out on the streets.

“The first-line supervisor is one of the most demanding positions in law enforcement,” Eden said. “... The department stands by its efforts to reform the promotional process to ensure that supervisors meet these standards.”

It’s not clear when the judge will rule.