Tuesday, June 30, 2020

Advice for Texas police reform activists outside the big counties: Interview with Chas Moore, plus was George Floyd set up by a crooked Houston narcotics cop? Texas' anachronistic 'riot' laws, and other stories

Better late than never, here's the June episode of Just Liberty's Reasonably Suspicious podcast, co-hosted by me and Amanda Marzullo.

This month, Mandy and I reflect on the last month's tumultuous protests and calls for police reform in Texas and beyond.

Top Story
  • Reflecting on the George Floyd protests, including an interview with Chas Moore of the Austin Justice Coalition.
Fill in the Blank
  • Was George Floyd set up by a crooked Houston narcotics cop?
  • The policy behind the slogan of "Defunding Police"
  • Texas' anachronistic "riot" laws
The Last Hurrah
  • Abolishing cops ... in schools?
  • How cops spend their time
  • How does Austin police Chief Brian Manley still have a job?
N.b., in the discussion of Texas' anachronistic riot laws, I mentioned historical examples of suppression of the civil-rights movement in East Texas that were also touched on in the interview with Chas. Though I clarified at the end I was only talking about East Texas, let me say for the record I am absolutely aware of civil rights activism elsewhere in the state. I was discussing events in northeast Texas - in particular in Marshall - and referencing the history discussed in this recent blog post. Mea culpa for any confusion.

Find a transcript of this episode below the jump. Enjoy!

Monday, June 29, 2020

Police reform roundup

Let's clear a few browser tabs; here are some odds and ends that recently caught my attention and may also interest Grits readers:

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Rodriguez must navigate attack over botched #SandraBland vote

Regular readers will recall the ignominious fate last year of Rep. James White's legislation, inspired by the Sandra Bland case, limiting police officers' authority to arrest people for Class C misdemeanors.

Confused and unmotivated Democrats killed the bill, twice! Despite widespread, bipartisan support. This left a terrible taste in my mouth, so Grits was not disappointed to see the issue arise in my own local state-senate race, where former County Judge Sarah Eckhardt criticized Rep. Eddie Gonzalez in a mailer for skipping out on the Friday evening vote.

To be clear, Grits had nothing to do with this mailer and has never even spoken about the issue with Eckhardt or her campaign. I learned of it when the postcard arrived in my mailbox. But I do think Democrats in gerrymandered safe districts should be held accountable when they screw up. And this was a big Democratic screw up: Killing the Sandra-Bland legislation first by ignorance, then by apathy.

Do I think Eddie's entire legislative career should be judged on that one bad decision? Of course not. At the same time, it's a valid criticism, and one that Grits made as soon as the smoke had cleared:
One absent Dem that we know of had legitimate reason not to be there: Donna Howard's husband had a medical emergency. But why would Austin's Eddie Rodriguez not show up? Members from Houston, San Antonio, and other drive-able locales went home early for the weekend instead of staying to vote.

If just two of them had cared more about preventing what happened to Sandra Bland than leaving work early to start their weekend, this bill would be on its way to becoming law.

Honestly, why bother seeking election to the Legislature if you're not going to show up on big votes to do your job?
I'm sure Rodriguez has made other contributions at the Legislature on other topics, and I'm sure his campaign plans to spend money emphasizing those. But he's never particularly been a leader or even much of a sympathizer on criminal-justice reform. That's a fair criticism, if an unfortunately timed one given the undeniably reformist tenor of the current historical moment. 

Eckhardt perhaps gets more credit for interest in justice reform, though it's also the case that the county inherently has a lot more criminal-justice business before it than an average legislator. 

Grits would submit Travis County wouldn't have a new Public Defender without Eckhardt and, eventually, she supported postponement of a proposed women's jail expansion. However, during those fights she rubbed some people the wrong way, and not all reformers in town are happy with her performance. (I tend to cut a little slack when the disputes were as nasty and bitter as that public-defender battle turned into, but you can't tell someone else when to take offense.)

Honestly, I could still be convinced either way in this race. What I want to hear is the same for both candidates: How has your attitude toward criminal-justice reform changed in the last month? I know your records. What I don't know is whether each of them recognizes the magnitude of the historical moment and intends to step up on justice reform going forward.

Eckhardt's mailer at a minimum signals she recognizes which way the political winds are blowing and wants to be seen as pursuing a reformist agenda. For Eddie, his response to this attack will in many ways define the strategic outline of the rest of the campaign. Because his record is not strong on criminal justice, to me, reacting defensively, as have some of his Twitter surrogates, risks falling into a trap where the rest of the campaign debate plays out on terrain that disfavors him.

If I were Eddie's consultant, I'd tell him to own the mistake on James White's bill, express regret for not prioritizing the issue, then tell us how recent events have affected his thinking and what he intends to do with regards to justice reform going forward.

Right now, lots of people who're suddenly sympathetic on justice issues are having to justify their apathy in the past. That's okay. Own it. Appreciate it. Take it for what it is: An opportunity for a fresh start, purchased in blood.

Tuesday, June 23, 2020

Reform updates from Dallas, Houston, and Austin, a police-union hissy fit, how police spend their time, and other stories

Here are a few odds and ends related to policing that merit Grits readers' attention:

Big D Demands for Police Reform
Check out a list of demands out of Dallas from anti-police brutality activists, and see coverage from the Dallas Morning News:
Dubbed 10 New Directions for Public Safety and Positive Community Change, the demands fall into one of two categories, the authors say: reprioritizing city and county money currently earmarked for public safety and increasing transparency and accountability.

Among the recommendations in the first pail: hiring mental health professionals to respond to emergencies and creating a city-county task force of community members to identify programs that can lift black and Latino residents out of poverty rather than locking them up.

The second group of suggestions aimed at police accountability includes prohibiting an officer from shooting at a person running away, benching officers accused of using deadly force until after a grand jury can investigate, and ending the county’s contract with the federal immigration department.
Policing Improvements in Houston Off to Slow Start 
In Houston, Mayor Sylvester Turner has latched onto the #8cantwait reforms as his response to recent reform calls, signing an executive order banning chokeholds and implementing other #8cantwait policies. These are good first steps but insufficient. Meanwhile, the Houston Chronicle has called for beefing up civilian oversight at Houston PD and the Harris County Commissioners Court wants to create oversight mechanisms for the sheriff and constables' offices at the county level. 

Grits' experience has been that policy changes like #8cantwait don't matter if agency culture doesn't support reform. E.g., Austin has a perfectly fine "duty to intervene" policy on the books, but cops who witness misconduct by their comrades in arms are seldom punished for it.

I'd also caution that civilian oversight in Texas makes little difference because state civil service law protects bad cops in Houston and most of the larger Texas agencies. Such boards help with transparency - the public knows more about police misconduct in jurisdictions that have them. But they don't prevent misconduct or provide meaningful redress to victims.

Speaking of Houston reforms, Grits believes that city's leaders should flat out abolish the HPD narcotics division. I predict that, if the audit of that division is ever made public, its findings will corroborate widespread problematic practices there. Their activities contribute little to public safety and have been a major source of scandal, of which Gerald Goines is only the most prominent example.

2018 Police Shootings in Austin Analyzed
In Austin, the Office of Police Oversight has produced an analysis of all Officer Involved Shootings at Austin PD in 2018: 12 incidents involving 11 suspects and 33 officers, 5 of them fatal. "In only 1 of the 12 incidents did officers use “less-lethal” force before using their firearms."

APD deemed two of the five fatalities suicides, though in one of those "suicides" police fired 10 shots at the person, hitting him at least twice (police say the suspect then shot himself in the head). The other was the so-called Austin bomber, who killed himself detonating one of his own devices. 

At least half the incidents involved a mental-health component, according to the report, and 25 of the 33 officers involved had less than six years on the force.

Suspects were armed in four of the five deadly shootings. In the 5th, a SWAT sniper shot and killed Hugo Alvarez while he was unarmed and exiting his home with his mother in response to police commands. 

Police Chief Resignations Complicate Austin's Conundrum
Speaking of Austin, despite the city manager affirming his support for police Chief Brian Manley, Grits still harbors a conceit that the dozens of community groups arrayed against him may prevail and he still could be removed/demoted. But the situation is made more complicated by the wave of police chiefs stepping down under fire around the nation. Makes hiring a replacement a more vexed question than when the #FireManley campaign began a month before George Floyd's death. Austin chief is a plum gig, so I've no doubt there'd be candidates available. But we don't want to get rid of Brian Manley and end up with more of the same. The city needs someone capable of instilling a reform-minded culture in the department, not just another cop who stayed in the profession long enough to be promoted up the ranks.\

In Hissy Fit, Union Tells Officers Not to Work Protests
The police union in Austin is advising officers not to work at protests if the city doesn't rescind its ban on firing tear gas into crowds. This to me is an easy one: Call their bluff. Police in Texas cannot strike. If they don't want to work their assignments, terminate their employment. The officers who believe they can't work a protest without using tear gas are officers we don't need.

Debating Abolition of School Police
The effort by Disability Rights, Texas Appleseed, and other groups to convince Texas school districts to abolish their police departments hasn't been met with success, yet, but is generating a robust debate. The Houston Chronicle editorialized in favor of the move. In San Antonio, school board members rejected the suggestion but pledged to examine disciplinary practices for officers. (Grits must admit, whenever I think of SA school police, in my mind's eye I see the cop bodyslamming a middle-school girl a few years back, though to be fair, the guy was fired for it.) For more background, here's a good summation of the research surrounding the efficacy of school-based police.

Budget shortfalls add risk to defund-police proposals
Grits has a nagging fear that budget shortfalls related to the COVID pandemic may undermine some of the divestment/reinvestment strategies being pursued by police-reform advocates at the local level. City Councils in Austin, Dallas and elsewhere have stated their intention to reduce police budgets and reinvest the savings in health/service-oriented approaches to solving social problems. Grits supports this approach. But nationwide, local government faces budget shortfalls because of the COVID recession. So I'm afraid we'll see local government cut police budgets but fail to subsequently invest savings in alternative approaches. Instead, the savings will go to ameliorating red ink in the budget. Then, if government doesn't invest to solve the social problems police deployments had been papering over, there's a risk of a backlash down the line.

I believe the divestment/reinvestment strategy can work. Spending ever-more money for police to respond to less and less crime makes little sense. But that reinvestment part is really important. If it doesn't happen, there's a big risk the "defunding" agenda becomes a trap down the line.

How Do Police Spend Their Time?
Police spend very little of their time responding to violent crime, much less preventing it, according to a review of public data by the New York Times. Serious violent crime make up only about 1% of calls for service and account for about 4% of police officers' time in jurisdictions for which they found data. About half their time is spent on non-criminal calls and traffic enforcement.

A hacker group released data from 200 police agencies and fusion centers that was stolen from a Houston-based web consultant. Now, though, the purported link to this data isn't working. If anyone knows another way to access it, please report in the comments.

Saturday, June 20, 2020

Policing budgets and outcomes: A Catch 22

Viewed broadly, America finds itself essentially at the bottom of a thirty-year crime decline. But as police have had less crime to respond to, their budgets and staffing have ballooned, reported Politico this week.

Police officials routinely tell the public that cutting their budgets would make us less safe. This is true even at agencies that had their budgets increase and saw crime rise.

Indeed, have you ever noticed that, when it comes to police budgets, there's no version of reality that would justify reduced funding?

If crime is going up, we're told we need more officers to address it.

If crime goes down, it's attributed to past budget increases and we're told cutting budgets would reverse progress.

The whole process resembles a self licking ice cream cone. To hear the police chiefs and city managers tell it, there apparently is no situation that justifies applying budget scrutiny to these agencies. 

Wednesday, June 17, 2020

Imagining a "George Floyd Act" for Texas

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has already suggested he'd be open to signing a "George Floyd Act" next legislative session, and legislative offices have begun jockeying over who should carry such a bill and what should be in it.

As a thought experiment, let's explore possible policy proposals such George-Floyd legislation might embrace. The Texas legislative session won't begin until January, so there's plenty of time to add to and refine this list. (As always, gentle readers, please suggest any omissions, tweaks, or criticisms of these ideas in the comments; now is the time for a robust discussion regarding how to confront these subjects.)

There will be a temptation to pass a narrow bill banning chokeholds, claiming victory, then everyone going on their merry way. Many departments are already looking to the #8CantWait proposal, which has been disavowed by leaders of the group that created it as inadequate to the moment. Too many departments are pretending that, by adopting those eight policy measures, they can say they've solved the problem. Advocates must be clear from the get go - both at the state and local level - that that's not good enough.

Many protesters have focused on scaling back the policing footprint, spurring a national debate over what it would look like to "defund the police." But local governments, not the state, decide how much money police departments receive, so Grits suspects state legislation will avoid the whole divestment/reinvestment debate. Other than Texas DPS, whose jurisdiction and governance issues differ significantly from local departments, the legislature has little to do with setting law-enforcement budgets.

So, what more substantive reforms might go into a state-level George Floyd Act in Texas?

Use of Force: New limits, greater transparency
Grits would like to see deadly force standards scaled back in Texas. Ours allows deadly force to be used in too many situations where it's not needed. In 2017, state Rep. Senfronia Thompson filed HB 2044 which included a first stab at that project. That bill would disallow deadly force unless officers faced an "imminent threat" of death or bodily injury to themselves or others. It also would have eliminated language that said deadly force could be used against anyone suspected of a violent felony, whether or not they posed an immediate threat. Finally, the bill would have required departments to implement policies of de-escalation and proportionate response. That legislation didn't pass, but its proposals should be revisited now.

Texas also needs more transparency and data surrounding use of force. As part of the Sandra Bland Act passed in 2017, Texas began to require reporting of use of force at Texas traffic stops. (We learned from that data that Houston residents are more likely to be assaulted by police at traffic stops than any other jurisdiction, using force on about one out of every 188 drivers stopped.) Texas also now has mandatory reporting for all police shooting episodes, whether or not the victim dies. But Texas does not gather comprehensive reporting on lesser use of force examples, and most local departments don't publish that data, if it's kept at all. That should now change. As Grits has said often on these questions, you can't manage what you do not measure. 

Duty to intervene
There are many "duties" of police set out in Texas statutes, including some that need to be scaled back, like the "duty" to arrest people for every violation under statute (an absurd assignment that no officer could possibly fulfill). But Texas law does not impose on officers a "duty to intervene" when another officer is violating law, departmental policy or harming a person unnecessarily in their presence. This is among the most striking images from George Floyd's murder: the other officers just casually standing there while a man died. We saw the same dynamic as protests filled the streets and cell-phone video captured numerous episodes of police brutality and excessive force. Typically, only a few officers engaged in the most abusive behavior, but their comrades-in-arms just stood there and watched.

Disciplinary processes/civil-service reform
Other possible reforms could focus on strengthening police disciplinary processes, especially in cities governed by the state civil service code (Local Government Code Ch. 143). Civil service rules make it exceedingly difficult for police chiefs to hold officers accountable, even when they sincerely want to. Just Liberty has already been asked by a handful of legislative offices what provisions of the civil-service code need revisiting, and came up with this short list:
  • 180 day rule: Currently, the civil-service code forbids disciplining officers after 180 days have passed since the alleged misconduct; this should be repealed.
  • Ending special treatment during investigations: Eliminate provisions letting officers see complaint/video/investigative files against them and giving them 48 hours before supervisors and investigators can question them about serious misconduct.
  • Create a strong, clear, progressive disciplinary matrix. This helps keep disciplinary actions against police from later being overturned in arbitration. The more consistent and standardized discipline becomes, the less likely it will be overturned on appeal. 
  • Transparency about police misconduct: eliminate LGC 143.089(g) making personnel files closed. Same records are already open at Sheriffs offices and non-civil-service cities, and it doesn't create problems for them.
  • Transparency in negotiations: Require that negotiations between city management and the union over police contracts must be public meetings that anyone can attend.
  • Forbid police union contracts from making disciplinary processes more lenient. Should only be able to enhance accountability in contracts, not diminish it.
  • Add a Sunset provision requiring voters to re-authorize civil service every ten years. The Lege has passed many cop-friendly anti-accountability provisions since most departments adopted it in the '40s. Voters never approved of most of the anti-accountability measures mentioned here, they were all added after the fact.
There are almost certainly other tweaks to the disciplinary process needed; this is what we came up with as a starting point on relatively short notice.

Corroboration for police testimony in drug stings
There's another reform element Grits feels like should be in any eponymous George Floyd bill that relates not to his death but his time in Texas. As it turns out, George Floyd was one of at least 160 people whom the Harris County District Attorney has identified as being convicted of a drug offense based solely on the uncorroborated testimony of a corrupt Houston narcotics officer named Gerald Goines.

There appears to be a good chance that George Floyd was set up by a corrupt narcotics cop in that case and may well have been innocent of the charge.

The Legislature has tried and failed to address this issue before. Most folks have forgotten the Tulia drug stings in the late '90s, in which an undercover cop named Tom Coleman lied to secure drug convictions against about 15% of the black population in that small, West Texas town. Coleman was eventually convicted of perjury and Gov. Rick Perry pardoned nearly all of the defendants.*

The following legislative session in 2001, then-Rep.-now-state-Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa filed a bill to require corroboration for undercover police officers in order to secure a drug conviction. The bill was scaled back during the process to only apply to testimony from non-police informants. That's still a big deal, since cases based on their testimony are more common than police officers personally going undercover. But the failure to require corroboration for cops left a giant loophole that Gerald Goines (and likely others at HPD narcotics, if we're honest about it) abused with impunity.

Grits believes Texas should go back and pick up that spare from the 2001 session. The state has shown it can still make plenty of drug cases using corroborated evidence (it's not like they stopped using informants post-2001, after all), but the requirement adds in a needed check on officers like Goines who would abuse their position just to bulk up arrest stats.

This is a non-comprehensive, first-cut list of suggestions for police-reform proposals that the Texas Legislature could embrace. It's meant to be a starting point for discussion, not the final word on anything. So definitely let me know what you think of these suggestions in the comments, as well as anything I might have missed that legislators should consider.

MORE: The Austin Statesman also offered suggestions for what should be in the Sandra Bland Act. A couple of their ideas - the Sandra-Bland no-arrest-for-Class-Cs and closing the "dead suspect loophole" - are likely to be filed as their own stand-alone bills. And in truth, closing the "dead suspect loophole" is only part of what we need to revive the public's open-records rights on these topics. The access we've lost goes much deeper than that.

*As a coda to that two-decades-old story, the Tulia cases launched an early effort that today might be categorized as part of an "abolish" or "defund" the police campaign. Tom Coleman worked for one of (at the time) 51 multi-county "regional narcotics task forces" which employed more than 700 narcotics officers across Texas. Your correspondent, then at ACLU of Texas, was part of a six-year campaign resulting in the outright abolition and defunding of these task forces in 2006. This is now mostly forgotten history and the effort was never replicated in other states. But it's among Grits' proudest achievements in a quarter-century of activism on these topics. Very few other #cjreform victories in Texas have been as thorough, or as satisfying.

Monday, June 15, 2020

Roundup on policing and COVID in prisons

Here are some recent articles Grits found enlightening that may interest readers as well:


More police-reform polling: People don't want to "defund" police; 50/50 on divestment/reinvestment; but other reforms are popular. See additional, related polling here, here, here, and here.

As cities grew safer, police budgets continued to rise.

Former police chief explains why it's so hard to fire bad cops.

COVID in Texas prisons

Data sources on racial disparities in the Texas justice system

Been asked a few times now by reporters where to get data about racial disparities in the Texas criminal-justice system. Were I assigned that task, here's where I'd start:
If you're aware of other sources on this topic, please add them in the comments.

Time to consider disbanding police departments in Texas (and no, I'm not calling to "abolish" police)

Grits has been thinking a lot recently about the barriers to meaningful police reform in Texas and ways around them. Chief among those barriers is the state civil service code governing most larger police agencies and various police-union contracts authorized by it.

Both the civil service code and those contracts include provisions making it difficult to fire police officers who engage in misconduct and, in the case of the contracts, may lock in certain employment and spending levels that thwart efforts to divest money from police and reinvest in other services that make people safer. 

In San Antonio, for example, 2/3 of fired officers get their job back, the Express-News reported recently. Repeatedly, officers at the center of high-profile misconduct episodes are reinstated by local civil-service commissions or arbitrators. It can be infuriating.

Long-time readers know the civil service code (Texas Local Government Code Chapter 143) has been the bane of Grits' existence for more than two decades. There are so many anti-accountability elements to it, it's mind boggling, and even folks like me who're familiar with its workings keep being surprised at how egregiously misguided are some of its provisions. E.g., I only recently learned about limitations on firing police chiefs, and I've been paying attention to these topics since 1995.

Grits has been among a vanishingly small group of people trying since the 1997 Texas legislative session to get some of these provisions changed, and we've never been successful. Texas has passed other policing reforms over the years, but in all that time, nobody's ever cracked the civil-service code nut in the Lone Star State. The police unions have been too powerful and reformers' natural institutional allies in that fight - police chiefs and the Texas Municipal League - have been too cowardly and restrained.

Plus, quite frankly, until about five minutes ago there simply wasn't broad-based support for police reform, even (perhaps especially) among Democrats. In Texas, at least (I can't speak to other states), all the folks now crowing that we must "abolish" the police were nowhere to be found when their budgets were ballooning over the last couple of decades. 

After the Ferguson protests, we began to see a handful of young advocates engaging in budget processes, but mostly aiming to limit growth: prospects for actually reducing budgets were for all intents and purposes, non-existent. For example, the Austin Justice Coalition, which recently called for a $100 million reduction in the Austin PD budget, before now has limited its asks to not adding more police positions to the budget. And they've never once won that battle.

Indeed, despite recent calls to "defund police" or to hold bad officers accountable, those lonely few of us pushing to restrain or reduce police budgets or improve police accountability mechanisms in Texas have typically found more allies in the conservative camp, where the agendas of opposing unions and reducing government budgets more naturally find ideological purchase, than among the lefty set. That's changing now, as new liberal allies step up. But it's important to recognize this is a very belated development.

So how do we crack this nut? Realistically, I see only two options. First, there's a (slight, IMO almost negligible) chance that the terms of political debate on these topics have so fundamentally changed that the Texas Legislature will act to scale back civil-service code protections for bad cops in the 2021 session. Honestly, I'm not holding my breath, and even if that happened, it fails to address the budgetary issues that crowd out funding for more effective solutions to problems like homelessness, addiction, and mental illness.

Instead, I've become convinced that the real solution may only be found in the examples of Camden, NJ, and now Minneapolis: Civil service departments must be formally disbanded and differently reconstituted. All the officers must be let go and then departments must create lists of those with problematic records and simply refuse to extend them job offers.

That's not to say Grits supports abolition of police. I don't. I support radically scaling back their budgets and overall footprint and spending the money instead on services-oriented approaches to homelessness, addiction, and mental illness. But actual crime and violent people do, in fact, exist, and failures to address them hurt black folks as disproportionately as does wanton police violence. (Much more on this, later.)

The goal of disbanding police departments is different from abolition. The purpose is to re-launch without the limits of the state civil service code and bypass anti-accountability provisions in union contracts. Whereas abolitionists would end policing altogether, disbanding police departments and reconstituting them seeks a fresh start, unencumbered by the bad decisions and practices of the past.

In some jurisdictions, this may also be the only way to reduce the size and scope of police forces. Some police contracts (but not all) limit departments' ability to abolish police positions or layoff officers. (Thankfully, in Austin the city retains that authority, but that's not universally true elsewhere.)

Dr. Phillip Goff points out that some contracts require a last-hired, first-fired policy in the event of layoffs. (He actually claimed all of them do, but that's factually inaccurate - e.g., Austin's contract contains no such provision.) This creates a problem because younger officers are likely to be more diverse and more progressive, while officers from the baby-boomer and Gen X generations may come to the table with racist and ideological baggage with which subsequent generations are less encumbered.

For agencies with last-hired-first-fired provisions in their contracts, getting rid of those old-school officers may actually cost more money in the short term via financial incentives to retire early. That certainly flies in the face of the defund-the-police agenda!

OTOH, many officers who engage in significant misconduct do so early in their careers. In Austin, Christopher Taylor has been on the force five years, has already killed two people under dubious circumstances, and admitted in court to filing a false police report that covered up misconduct by other officers.

What you really want is the opportunity for a clean sweep: To identify officers with problematic backgrounds, young and old, and excise them from the force in one fell swoop. Only disbanding/reconstituting departments would afford that option.

Grits is not a labor lawyer (nor any kind of lawyer at all, for that matter), and I have little doubt that there will be unforeseen difficulties and complications to this approach. But the entire police-reform project is fraught with difficulties and complications. There's no easy solution to any of this and anyone who claims otherwise is lying to you. For me, I'm willing to try a new difficult path, because the difficult path we've been on doesn't appear it will get us anywhere close to a desired destination.

UPDATE/CAVEAT: Michelle Phelps and others have pointed out that Camden NJ engages in aggressive "broken windows" policing (under the guise of "community policing") in ways that are problematic and one wouldn't want to replicate. (See this coverage, for example.) Grits agrees. I'm only calling to replicate the tactic of disbanding and reconstituting the department, not every jot and tittle of their approach after that.

Sunday, June 14, 2020

George Floyd is Texas' new favorite son: Small-town protests change police-politics landscape, and make history in East Texas

Protests in the big cities have received the most attention, but one of the most remarkable developments on the civil-rights front in Grits' lifetime has been the rise of protest events in smaller Texas towns where we've never witnessed this sort of activism. 

Small-town Texas 💘 #BlackLivesMatter
On Twitter, Texas Monthly compiled a list of small-town protests. Rural hamlets where a decade ago such protests seemed unimaginable - like Vidor, Jasper, Hondo, or Alpine - witnessed sizable turnouts and impassioned speeches. Places like TexarkanaAmarillo, or Wichita Falls, I'm certain, considered themselves immune to such upheaval, but all saw significant protest events. In tiny Paris, TX, a city council member resigned following criticisms he made of protesters on social media and a censure vote by his colleagues. Most counties where anyone actually lives saw protests.

Reflecting on the existence of civil-rights protests in my hometown
Wade Goodwyn at NPR this week ran a story featuring protests in my hometown of Tyler, which was largely bypassed during the civil-rights movement of the '50s and '60s. The idea of a Black Lives Matter protest in Bergfeld Park frankly boggles the mind, and indeed, someone allegedly threatened to shoot protest leaders if they held the event.

Grits recalls in the early aughts visiting Texas College, an HBC in North Tyler, to give a Know-Your-Rights training when I was at ACLU-TX. The prof who invited me described how Marshall, Tx, lying twenty miles from the Louisiana border across from Shreveport, was as far west as the civil-rights protests extended into Texas' Piney Woods. Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke at Marshall's Wiley College in March 1960, against the wishes of the administration, and young activists inspired by his visit went on to hold sit ins at the local Woolworth department store. 

The retaliation was intense: Police turned water hoses on the students, and the President of Bishop College (a now-defunct HBC, also in Marshall), who'd invited Dr. King, was red-baited, formally accused of being a Communist by then-Governor Price Daniel, and run out of his job. Student organizers from both Wiley and Bishop colleges were arrested, though most of the charges were dismissed later that year. That summer, though, all Wiley faculty who had not supported the administration in opposing Dr. King's visit were fired. (Go here for the best account I've found of the incident.)

After that example, scarce few people at Texas College or really, throughout East Texas, were willing to speak up for civil rights. Would-be black movement leaders were largely cowed into submission and the civil-rights movement that gripped the rest of the American South largely passed the region by for the next 60 years. Until now.

MORE: The other big, early moment that decapitated the civil rights movement in East Texas was the banishment of the NAACP from Texas courts in 1957. Cory McCoy at the Tyler Morning Telegraph re-told that story a few years back, check it out. AND MORE: From the Texas Observer, "What the Black Lives Matter protests mean for East Texas."

Charges dropped against hundreds of protesters arrested in Houston
Two hundred miles south, in Houston, more than 650 people were arrested during recent police accountability protests. Harris County DA Kim Ogg this week dropped charges against more than 600 of them. While Grits is glad charges were dismissed, local defense attorneys pointed out that the DA's office in Harris County must pre-approve all non-warrant-based arrests. So if there was no probable cause to think these folks committed crimes, they probably should have figured that out during intake and avoided arresting these folks on the front end.

Introducing the George Floyd Act
In light of the broad-based reaction in Texas' hinterlands, Gov. Greg Abbott's response to recent events seems less surprising. For a moment, when he issued a disaster declaration threatening to deputize federal agents to combat protesters in the Texas' large cities, Grits feared he was about to channel his inner-Price Daniel and crack down on everyone involved. Since then, though, his rhetoric has softened. Recently, he met privately with George Floyd's family and pledged to enact reform, despite tepid support for police accountability measures so far on his watch.

Similarly, at the legislature, members who were at best lukewarm toward police-reform bills are now emerging as champions, while our actual, historical champions are licking their chops at all the new opportunities emerging. For now, at least, it's official: George Floyd is Texas' new favorite son.

Family: More to death-in-custody of Enrique Quiroz than official reports let on

The police abuse cases that receive national attention like George Floyd typically are ones where a bystander captures the incident on cell-phone video and police are unable to contain information about the event. But isn't it remarkable how many problematic police killings in Austin (and really, everywhere) aren't fleshed out in the press until well after the fact, if at all?

Recently, the Statesman's Tony Plohetski told the story of Javier Ambler, who died begging for his life while a Williamson County Sheriff's deputy repeatedly tazed him. The incident happened more than a year ago but was only fully reported this month.

Then, on March 31st, Enrique Quiroz, died after being tazed repeatedly by Austin PD. Though Quiroz was arrested for trespassing, the family says he had the homeowners' permission to be there. The family this week held their own amateur press conference to tell their side of the story. 

Police said Quiroz died of medical complications after being subdued, but family members say he was beaten and tazed, then dragged down the stairs in handcuffs "like an animal." (The death in custody report filed by APD said officers had to "help him down the stairs.") Before the family spoke up, press reports had exceedingly sparse. Only KXAN covered their presser, and we still haven't seen any reporters truly dig into the episode.

Hundreds of complaints filed against police over Austin protests

The Austin Office of Police Oversight received complaints from 606 people between May 29 and June 10, and is recommending 227 separate complaints based on those communications. The release of this information in and of itself is a victory for transparency in police oversight: Before 2018 changes to the police contract won by the Austin Justice Coalition and their allies, the city would have deep sixed this information and nobody would ever have known any complaint details. Even with names and locations redacted, the allegations are telling.

One complainant reported that a protester was "receiving medical help from a professional at protest when officers shot him in the head along with the medic that was administering help." Another decried the APD firing "chemical weapons" (read: tear gas) into crowds. Yet another lamented police "firing a foam bullet from less than 12 feet away directly at a protester that resulted in the need for limb-saving surgery."

Another suggested, “It seems 'less-lethal munition' is a name that gives the user an a false sense to release rounds with less consequences to the human being that is the target. It can''t be 'less lethal' if it's fired at close range. Please abolish the name and idea of 'less-lethal munition.'" Yet another described an incident where the "protester was standing still, hands in his pocket, posing no threat. And he was [pepper] sprayed at point-blank range. Needless, senseless use of force." 

Another complainant described how an officer "maced/sprayed [a] protester and two other women standing on either side of her, one of which was an 14-year-old girl," wondering, "Why has he not been fired already?"

The classmates of Levi Ayala filed a complaint over shooting him in the head with "less lethal" munitions. "As students, as community members, and as humans, we demand responsibility for these inhumane actions," read their letter.

“My Mother Was Shot With Bean Bag Rounds By A Firing Squad Of Officers," said yet another complaint. "She has a huge wound on her leg from the incident. Even now a week later she is feeling pain."

One protester complained not of brutality but of demeaning attitudes by officers:
I could see the smirks on some of the officers faces as they laughed at my sign when I walked by (my sign said: check the privilege & please don’t kill my son because he’s black). Some officers took 30 minutes of their time to tell me things like: “you can hold that sign all day it won’t make a difference,” “we will always have each other’s back, “my brothers in uniform die too,” “your sign doesn’t even make sense” ... oh and one officer even had the nerve to look me up and down and blow me a kiss. ... I got so angry at his insensitivity. ... those actions by OUR LOCAL PD make it hard to continue peaceful protests. 
Some complainants wondered why officers who witnessed abuse didn't intervene or report wrongdoers themselves: "I know I can report it, but why do I have to police my police? There were other police around."

One complainant wondered, "Why shouldn’t I vote to allocate funding away from the police department when they pose more threat than a benefit for the city? Austin is better than this." Yet another opined, "I find it disgusting that a city that applauds itself as diverse, safe, liberal and weird encourages wanton police violence."

Go here to read excerpts from the complaints and a list of relevant APD policies the OPO says should be reviewed. The APD Internal Affairs Division has a big job in front of them. Frankly, Grits fears they're not up to it.

Friday, June 12, 2020

Austin Council demands reform; police chief touts toothless half measures

Whether history will view the resolutions passed at the Austin City Council yesterday as a true turning point for policing in this city remains to be seen. But the resolutions at least opened up the possibility we could witness change on a scale previously unseen at the police department in the Texas capital.

Leadership Change: Council has "No Confidence"
Item #96 on yesterday's agenda included a statement of no confidence regarding Police Chief Brian Manley and the city's public-safety leadership team: "The elected members of City Council have no confidence that current Austin Police Department leadership intends to implement the policy and culture changes required to end the disproportionate impact of police violence." 

Two more city council members last night - Alison Alter and Leslie Pool - openly called for a change in leadership at Austin PD, adding their voices to four others who'd already said they've lost faith in Chief Manley to lead the department. Pool's comments were particularly surprising as until now she's been the police department's foremost champion on the council. Yet, she insisted, "We cannot move forward and heal without a change in leadership."

Alter went further, calling out city manager Spencer Cronk in no uncertain terms for his conspicuous silence during the city's tumultuous last two weeks, accusing him of failing to lead. She said her office had received more than 13,000 emails supporting change, with many of them calling for Chief Manley's ouster. Why had he not acted?

Meanwhile, although the news pages of the Austin Statesman continued their lapdog ways (more on this in a moment), the editorial staff issued a commentary accusing APD of succumbing to "cultural rot" under Manley's rule. "As a leader," they wrote, "Manley has not demonstrated the resolve to push for deep-seated cultural changes at the agency where he has spent his entire law enforcement career."

I don't know if having a "no confidence" resolution unanimously pass and six of 11 council members openly calling for Manley's ouster will be enough to get rid of him, but certainly the pressure is mounting.

Item #96 also included a call for divesting from Austin PD and spending more money instead on alternative approaches to public safety. Four council members from the dais echoed calls from the Austin Justice Coalition to reduce the APD budget by $100 million, while the rest agreed there should be some reduction but declined to put a number on it.

If it happens, it will be a big deal: Austin PD's budget has only ever gone up in my adult lifetime. Paying for policing has supplanted other public expenditures to address issues like homelessness, mental health, and addiction, and is the primary driver of city property-tax increases.

However, this aspect of the resolution is purely aspirational and the council will very soon get an opportunity to put the taxpayers' money where their mouth is: The council returns in late July to hammer out the next year's budget, already facing constraints from falling sales tax revenue. How much APD's budget is reduced and what those funds will be used for instead will all be decided in August. Whether they implement the priorities evinced in this resolution will be determined entirely by whether the local reform movement can keep up the pressure they were able to exert on the council this week. We'll see.

Limiting Use of Force
Item #95 on last night's agenda directed the Austin PD to rewrite its general order provisions related to use of force, restricting when officers can use deadly force, making explicit their duties to implement de-escalation tactics wherever feasible. The resolution prohibits the use of tear gas, limits deployment of impact munitions, and discourages acquisition of military-style equipment, including from the federal government's much-maligned 1033 program.

This may be the most substantive change of the evening - it's certainly the one where Chief Manley pushed back the hardest - but it, too, amounts merely to an opening gambit. Now the general orders must be rewritten, and although the City Council insisted that the Office of Police Oversight be a big part of that, Chief Manley is the person who issues those orders.

So the questions become: 1) will the rewritten general orders faithfully implement council's direction? And, 2) will APD leadership enforce changes to use of force policy with which they disagree? The latter question is a big reason why most of the city council has spoken up to call for Chief Manley's ouster: They keep enacting policies that he simply doesn't implement.

Indeed, in many cases Austin has decent policies on the books, but current management won't enforce them. For example, APD already has rules on the books creating a duty to intervene when officers see their comrades-in-arms engaged in misconduct. But the entire city has seen videos of APD officers indiscriminately firing impact munitions into crowds, and even shooting at medical personnel: No officers intervened and no officers have been punished for failing to do so.

Writing better policies is only important if departments then train on them and enforce them when violated. Otherwise, culture eats policy for breakfast. That's why changing leadership is so important.

Manley's PR Pushback
With these changes as a backdrop, let's turn to Chief Manley's PR offensive launched during the day while the city council listened to hours of public testimony. He held a press conference with a group called JUST America purporting to announce new reforms. But those reforms ranged from achingly modest to non-existent, not remotely approaching the changes for which the city council is asking. When grilled by the City Council last night, Manley announced that really there was nothing new in them and the press conference had only clarified existing practices in order to educate the public.

Manley's new partner, the group JUST America is an odd duck: Nobody in the movement whom Grits works with had ever heard of them or their leaders when their press conference was announced. And it's remarkable that such a new group could get so much press coverage of their efforts when organizations like the Austin Justice Coalition capable of putting 10,000 people in the street (as they did last Sunday) can't get their agenda covered in the local press.

JUST America portrayed itself as a community group formed in the wake of the recent protests. But there's a debate on an Austin subreddit on whether or not they're a front group for the Austin Police Department.

I don't know which is true. As I'd said on Twitter, I "can't tell if they're straight-up Astroturf or just naive young people being used by Chief Manley to undercut real reform. At this point, I'm inclined to think it doesn't matter which is the case - the result is the same."

If they're a front group trying to give APD and Chief Manley positive PR, so far it's worked. The Statesman treated their PR gambit as a news event on equal footing with the City Council's actions, though the latter was objectively a far more serious and important development than the former. If they're sincere, JUST America's failure to engage or coordinate efforts with established civil rights activists has led them to a strategy that undercuts more serious reform.


If Austin City Council members follow through, what they did yesterday could be the beginning of significant change at the police department. If they chicken out and local media continues to provide the department cover, as we saw with their lapdog coverage of the JUST America presser, momentum could easily be lost. My crystal ball is hazy and Grits can't say what will happen. But the possibility for real change exists where it did not three weeks ago, and as my father likes to say, that's "better than a sharp stick in the eye."

Tuesday, June 09, 2020

Big D city-council majority endorses defunding police agenda; other Texas cities may follow suit

The Dallas City Council is considering its own defunding police agenda. Reported the Dallas Morning News:
as the council tries to address ongoing demonstrations against police violence, more members say they’re open to “defunding” — or reallocating resources from public safety into other city services.

Several council members plan to release a memo calling for City Manager T.C. Broadnax to propose budget options that would take public safety dollars and funnel them into other resources to “restore trust.” The council will also ask for discussions on the topic to happen at their meetings. Ten out of 14 council members have supported the memo and plan to send duplicate letters to the city manager, said Adam Bazaldua.

Notably, reported the Morning News, "Calls to reduce the police budget come as the city faces anywhere from a $73 million to $134 million shortfall next fiscal year because of the coronavirus pandemic." That's the backdrop for this debate in every city, fwiw: We're telling them to cut police budgets at a time when they can't afford to keep expanding them, anyway.

In Houston, city council member Leticia Plummer proposed a budget amendment to eliminate 200 vacant positions at the Houston PD and cut that money from the budget. Mayor Sylvester Turner opposes it. (Houston is a strong-mayor city, unlike Dallas or Austin, so he has unilateral power to veto such measures.)

The city council in San Antonio has heard calls for the city to reduce the police department budget, but hasn't seen any formal proposals yet.

Meanwhile, in Austin, all 11 city council members today endorsed the reform resolutions being voted on Thursday, including a resolution telling the city manager to present a smaller police budget when the council comes back from their break in July. The council members endorsed these provisions after the police union asked them to delay the process, which sends a powerful statement in and of itself. In 25 years of working on these topics in Austin, Grits has never seen the union snubbed so firmly.

Protest fallout, remembering George Floyd, abolishing police in schools, coronavirus and the courts, and other stories

Let's clear a few browser tabs with a roundup of odds and ends that merit Grits readers' attention:

Austin city council ready for its close up on police reform
First, on Thursday, the Austin City Council will hear 5 #cjreform resolutions including a directive to strengthen Austin PD's use of force policy and another calling for a reduction in the police department's budget. Council offices report having received so many thousands of emails and phone calls that their systems are failing and staff are swamped! See Just Liberty's summary of the resolutions (including a link for people who want to sign up to speak), and here's an Austin Justice Coalition petition calling for, among other things, a $100 million reduction in the police department budget. The Austin Statesman ran a feature this week on how recent protests are putting more pressure on the city manager to remove Chief Brian Manley, though regular Grits readers won't find much there they don't already know.

Remembering George Floyd
George Floyd's funeral is today in Houston, his hometown. The Houston Chronicle this week ran a nice profile of Floyd's Houston years, adding to what we learned in Mike Hall's Texas Monthly profile on the same topic. Grits still can't get over the fact that Floyd was one of the people to whom the Harris County DA's office sent a letter informing them an old drug conviction was based solely on the testimony of disgraced narcotics cop Gerald Goines. It's possible he could have been eligible to have that conviction overturned via habeas corpus, but now he'll never have the chance.

Polling demonstrates support for demonstrations, de-policing
We're starting to see polling in the wake of recent police-accountability protests. The first two I've seen have been from Data for Progress, and now there's a Washington Post-Schar School poll, covered in this news story. The DFP poll in particular found bipartisan support for taking issues like addiction and mental health out of the purview of law enforcement and creating a "new first-responder agency" to deal with them. Both polls found the public broadly supported the protests and think American policing needs to change. MORE: The New York Times reports on another poll finding massive new support for the Black Lives Matter movement.

Abolish school police
There has been lots of discussion lately of calls to "abolish police," and your correspondent may soon address some of those topics in more detail. As I said in Texas Monthly, I'm more for radically scaling back police functions than full-blown abolition, though I agree with many of the arguments abolitionists are making.  But one place where Grits has no qualms about an abolitionist stance is police in schools: I've been on board with this agenda for years. This week, several organizations formally called on Houston ISD to eliminate its police department and instead contract with local agencies who would respond only to emergency situations, reported the Houston Chronicle. Yes, yes, yes! This would free up resources that could be better used for other purposes. Houston ISD employs more cops than counselors and social workers, who are understaffed throughout the district. Reported the Chronicle: "State data shows HISD employed one counselor for every 900 students in 2019-20, well below the 1-to-250 ratio recommended by the American School Counselor Association. The district also staffed one social worker for every 6,350 students, far from the National Association of Social Work’s recommended 1-to-250 ratio."

Judges violate Abbott executive order without consequence
Some judges in Harris County are releasing inmates in violation of Greg Abbott's executive order on jails when they would otherwise be eligible for release based on good-time credits. And guess what? Just like the Texas Supreme Court said, nobody is arresting them for it. Because that was always stupid, obviously unconstitutional, and never going to happen.

Coronavirus and the courts: Smith County edition
At the Tyler Morning Telegraph, Cory McCoy has a great article on how the coronavirus has impacted the local court system. Their biggest problem is how to conduct jury trials, which have been temporarily suspended. But other changes have been positive, such as "an increase in remote communication in jail, nonviolent offenders spending less time behind bars and the ability to more quickly move misdemeanor cases." There's also a good discussion of marijuana cases, which have been complicated by the state's inability to test to distinguish it from hemp. Smith County is one of the jurisdictions where the District Attorney chose to continue prosecuting pot cases even though they cannot test. So, these cases are dragging out with defendants paying supervision fees and undergoing weekly urine testing in the mean time. That sounds like a big waste, and is really an oppressive policy for such low-level misdemeanor defendants, considering most Americans support legalization of recreational marijuana use. 

Man begged for his life while Williamson County deputy repeatedly tazed him, then he died

At the Austin Statesman, Tony Plohetski has the story of a man killed by Williamson County Sheriff's deputies last year while reality-TV cameras looked on as he begged for his life. His story opens:
Javier Ambler was driving home from a friendly poker game in the early hours of March 28, 2019, when a Williamson County sheriff’s deputy noticed that he failed to dim the headlights of his SUV to oncoming traffic.

Twenty-eight minutes later, the black father of two sons lay dying on a North Austin street after deputies held him down and used Tasers on him four times while a crew from A&E’s reality show “Live PD” filmed.

Ambler, a 40-year-old former postal worker, repeatedly pleaded for mercy, telling deputies he had congestive heart failure and couldn’t breathe. He cried, “Save me,” before deputies deployed a final shock.

His death never made headlines.
While Ambler was chased, stopped, and assaulted by a Williamson County Sheriff's deputy, the death-in-custody report was filed by the Austin PD, since the death occurred in their jurisdiction. Notably, "As they crossed into Travis County, Austin officers were instructed not to get involved in the pursuit because they are allowed only to chase dangerous criminals."

Plohetski reviewed video and captured this final exchange between Ambler and Deputy Zachary Camden. Amber begged for his life while Camden repeatedly tazed him:
“I have congestive heart failure,” Ambler says. “I have congestive heart failure. I can’t breathe.”

As the deputies scream orders, Ambler, between gasps, tells them he’s trying to follow their commands. Another four times he tells the deputies he can’t breathe.

“I am not resisting,” Ambler cries. “Sir, I can’t breathe. ... Please. ... Please.”

The deputies, who are on top of Ambler, continue yelling at him to put his arms behind his back.

“Save me,” Ambler cries.

“Do what we’re asking you to do!” a deputy yells.

“I can’t,” Ambler says, the last words the video captures from him just before one of the deputies deploys his Taser a fourth and final time at 1:47 a.m.

Ambler’s hands go limp, and the deputies place handcuffs around his wrists.

Moments later, they realized he was unconscious and his pulse had stopped.
Javier Ambler: Say his name. 

Sunday, June 07, 2020

Austin City Council to consider limiting police use of force, no-confidence vote for police chief, in wake of recent protests

Next Thursday, the Austin City Council will consider several resolutions related to policing issues in response to recent protests. Two in particular merit Grits readers' attention:

Item 95 by Greg Casar would limit use of lethal force and so-called less-lethal munititions. The new direction on police use of force policy would be much more restrictive than the current one:
  • Use of deadly force against individuals, including persons fleeing (in vehicle or on foot), shall be limited to situations where necessary for self-defense or defense of others against an imminent deadly threat, or threat of serious bodily injury;
  • Deadly force shall not be used unless all reasonable alternatives have been exhausted; and
  • Use of force by APD shall incorporate de-escalation tactics in all circumstances. 
The resolution also declares that "use of tear gas or impact munitions against persons exercising their First Amendment rights is strictly prohibited," declares that "the use, stockpile, and purchase of military-grade equipment shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible," tells the City Manager to change policies to restrict use of no-knock warrants, and creates new restrictions and reporting requirements for use of facial-recognition technology.

Item 96 by Natasha Harper Madison declares the city council has "no confidence" in the city's current public-safety leadership, including Police Chief Brian Manley. This is important because, under the city charter, the council cannot advocate firing or demoting Manley, only the city manager can do that. But they can express an opinion about his job performance, and a no-confidence vote would send a strong signal to City Manager Spencer Cronk that Chief Manley needs to go. 

Item 96 also takes a first step toward reducing Austin PD's budget by directing the city manager to eliminate funding for sworn officer positions in the budget that the city hasn't been able to fill and reallocating the money toward alternative approaches to solving problems.

There are several additional, related resolutions on the agenda. Go here to read Just Liberty's summary and find out how to support these measures.

Saturday, June 06, 2020

Video of injured Austin protesters, Texas Monthly interviews Grits and Chas Moore, local TX GOP chairs tell on themselves, when cussing is (not) a crime, and other stories

There's been so much coverage of policing issues in the last few days, rounding it all up would be an impossible task. But here are a few odds and ends that merit Grits readers' attention:

Video of injured Austin protesters
A bunch of people have asked me to post the police brutality video my wife presented at Thursday's Austin City Council meeting. This was actually prepared by a gal named Catina Voellinger, who has posted it on Facebook. Watch it here

Texas Monthly, Chas, and me
Texas Monthly interviewed me and the Austin Justice Coalition's Chas Moore on policing issues in the wake of recent protests. Read the Q&A here.

Telling on themselves
Numerous Texas GOP county party chairs posted missives on Facebook suggesting George Floyd's death was staged to make Donald Trump and the GOP look bad (smfh). One of them, Jim Kaelin, until 2018 was the Nueces County Sheriff! Another one, reported the Texas Tribune, "posted a racist image of a Martin Luther King Jr. quote next to a banana." Meanwhile, Texas' Agriculture Commissioner, Sid Miller, said there was "no doubt" in his mind that protesters were being paid by George Soros to sow chaos. Ag commissioner is a statewide elected position. Needless to say, all these stances are asinine, ass-i-ten, ass-eleven ... The Governor, Lt. Governor, and Senator John Cornyn denounced the party chairs, but I've yet to hear any statewide electeds address Miller's nutty, anti-Semitic remarks.

Remembering Mike Ramos
At the Texas Observer, Michael Barajas offered up a profile of Mike Ramos, a black Ausinite who was killed by police in April, spawning widespread calls for Austin Police Chief Brian Manley to resign well before the recent protests ever began. (See Grits coverage here, here, here, here, and here.) Just Liberty put up an action page so Austinites could contact City Manager Spencer Cronk to call for Manley's ouster. If you live in the Texas capital and haven't done so yet, go here to send your own message. Nearly 2,500 people have done so so far. Also, a GoFundMe page was set up to help his mother with expenses; Grits encourages you to give to it generously.

Remembering Mauris DeSilva
The Austin PD officer who shot Mike Ramos nine months earlier had also killed Mauris DeSilva, a neuroscientist who worked at the Naval Medical Research Unit in San Antonio. At the Texas Observer, Michelle Raji has a fine story on that case titled, "Why is APD responding to mental health crises like violent crimes?" Why, indeed! Very glad to see this published, this case received far too little attention when it happened.

Remembering Levi Ayala
At Texas Monthly, the indefatigable Michael Hall tells the story of 16-year old Levi Ayala, who was shot in the head with a bean bag round and seriously injured while observing the recent Austin protests. If you haven't seen the video of this one, it's indefensible. This kid was doing nothing to merit being shot and nearly killed.

When the shine wears off
Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo has been selling himself in the national press as a progressive reformer. But locals aren't buying it. Similarly, some in Dallas are calling for the Dallas police chief's resignation because of how her department reacted to the George-Floyd protests.

Cussing a crime?
The Baytown police chief filed a complaint against his own police officers after seeing video of them aggressively arresting young men for cussing. One of the cops had previously been accused of police brutality in a high-profile incident, but that time his department defended him. There's a Houston Chronicle editorial citing this episode as evidence why departments should fire "bad apples."  That's not my favorite analogy, but definitely those cops shouldn't be cops. Grits can never think of the Baytown PD without remembering Luis Torres, whom Baytown officers beat to death on video while he was handcuffed back in 2002. At the time, I was Police Accountability Project Director at ACLU of Texas; check out a series of posters we commissioned about the Torres case.

Tarrant County Jail dinged for ignoring health concerns
The Tarrant County Jail briefly lost its state certification last month after a man died and inspectors discovered jailers had failed to check on him regularly per state protocols. Also last month, a woman gave birth in the Tarrant jail and nobody noticed until after the fact. The Sheriff became defensive when questioned by the commissioners court, but that's a pretty astounding level of neglect/incompetence.

'Race and Reasonableness in Police Killings'
Finally, garnering far less attention than protest-related news, a new article from the Boston University Law Review titled "Race and Reasonableness in Police Killings" argues that, "standards in constitutional case law fail to anticipate the circumstances of fatal police shootings and are therefore seemingly irrelevant in preventing racial disparities in police fatal police shootings." Grits couldn't agree more. Give it a read.

Friday, June 05, 2020

If Austin Police Chief Brian Manley won't resign, he needs a new job title

In Austin, city legal staff has told City Manager Spencer Cronk that the state civil service code won't allow him to fire Chief Brian Manley, only demote him to chief of staff. This is due to Sec. 143.013(c) of the Texas Local Government Code which mandates that:
if a person is removed from the position of department head, the person shall be reinstated in the department and placed in a position with a rank not lower than that held by the person immediately before appointment as department head. The person retains all rights of seniority in the department.
The statute does not prevent firing someone brought in from the outside, but if the city promotes from within, they can only demote. Manley was chief of staff to former Chief Art Acevedo before being elevated to chief, so the City Manager is being told he could only be demoted to chief of staff, not fired. And since no new chief would want the job if they couldn't select their own leadership team, this is seen as a non-starter.

Still, Grits doesn't see this news as insurmountable, though it's being portrayed that way at city hall.

Your correspondent has been attempting to reform provisions in the Texas civil service code for more than two decades, but I must admit this was a new one to me. Considering its implications raises a few thoughts:

First, this is an excellent argument why no civil service city in Texas should ever promote a police chief from within if it means they cannot fire them. The Legislature should consider revising that provision when it meets next year.

Second, the City Manager could and should ask Chief Manley for his resignation. If he resigns, this provision becomes moot.

Third, Grits can envision more creative options besides putting Manley back as chief of staff. The statute doesn't require he get his old job back, but instead says he must be placed in a "position with a rank not lower than that held by the person immediately before appointment as department head."

So, Grits proposes that, if Manley won't resign, the city should create a new position on the organizational chart that's parallel with the chief of staff but doesn't supervise any other staff. It could have the same pay and rank but none of the power.

You could label the position something like "Asshole Who Wouldn't Resign," or, if you prefer a catchy acronym, simply "Person In Government."

Let him work from home or office him in a storage closet where they keep the toilet paper and cleaning supplies.

Yes, the city would still have to pay him, but that's the price the City Manager would have to pay for the poor management decision of hiring someone who could not be removed. It's worth mentioning that advocates have suggested city legal staff advising him on public safety issues should all be re-assigned because they routinely give bad advice. City Manager Cronk, who came here from Minneapolis, needed to know that a statute might limit his ability to fire Manley before he hired him. Their failure to tell him is another strong datapoint arguing for those lawyers to be re-assigned.

Maybe Manley would stay on under such circumstances, or, since he's fully vested and already put in more than 30 years at the department, maybe he'd just retire. In the end, Grits wouldn't particularly care. He just needs to not be Chief anymore.