English
Spanish
(Photo by Edgar Mendez)
Jarrett English, senior field organizer of ACLU Wisconsin, writes there are some points that need to be cleared up about the settlement of an ACLU lawsuit regarding the MPD’s “stop and frisk” policies.
A recent Forum on Police Community Relations at the Washington Park Senior Center surfaced some major inaccuracies stated publicly by Milwaukee Police Department officials.
1. The settlement of the ACLU lawsuit regarding the Milwaukee Police Department’s longstanding “stop and frisk” policies is not subject to reconciliation with the Department of Justice draft report recommendations. While Markasa Tucker, Tammy L. Rivera, Fred Royal and others on the Community Collaborative Committee are doing great work to incorporate those recommendations into standard procedures, that work is a completely separate process.
The ACLU lawsuit is now a settled and signed Federal Court Order The terms of the settlement are NOT optional for the Milwaukee police to comply with nor are they continuing to be negotiated. The MPD, the Fire and Police Commission and the city must comply as ordered by the federal court and overseen by the monitoring consultant and the ACLU.
2. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are NOT optional for police officers to follow; they are mandatory. Violations make an officer subject to immediate discipline and possible termination. SOPs are based on state law, the state constitution, the MPD code of conduct, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights among other precedents. There’s nothing optional about them although the oversight has been severely lacking throughout the history of MPD. That will be changing.
It’s true that Chief Alfonso Morales seems to be undertaking efforts toward real reform, which is absolutely necessary. We support and acknowledge his efforts. The previous police administration did not have the will and refused to find a way to change the deeply problematic and racist culture of the Milwaukee Police Department. Because of its history in this city, we are in the territory of “’trust needs to be earned and verified perpetually afterwards”.
Morales has a mandate, but it is not his own; it was given to him by the people and the community, who have suffered under decades of misconduct and corruption in the Milwaukee Police Department.
But it’s more than that; it’ a moral and ethical duty that the city correct the wrongs of the department and that its very real challenges are not used as an excuse to bulldoze the God-given, constitutionally enshrined rights of the great people of Milwaukee.
Furthermore, it’s not the duty of the people to regain the trust of the police but the duty of the police, who are paid very well by the people, to gain the people’s trust and not misuse it. The respect of the people, their rights, and needs for safety are paramount and must be equally protected.
For city officials and MPD to ever act otherwise is disrespectful. They work for the people; the people don’t work for MPD. Let’s make sure as a community that that’s how things are operated going forward.
We don’t want to talk about reform; we are going to be about it and we want to give the entire community a chance to join in. If you want to hear the details of the ACLU settlement, how it came to be and how it will be enforced, come to The Justice Tour, on Saturday, Oct. 13, from 2 to 5 pm at Centennial Hall, where you can celebrate and become a part of the inevitable victory of the people in this city.
I don’t mean to quibble with my brother Jarrett, but, regarding his statement:
1. The settlement of the ACLU lawsuit regarding the Milwaukee Police Department’s longstanding “stop and frisk” policies is not subject to reconciliation with the Department of Justice draft report recommendations. While Markasa Tucker, Tammy L. Rivera, Fred Royal and others on the Community Collaborative Committee are doing great work to incorporate those recommendations into standard procedures, that work is a completely separate process.
Per the Settlement Agreement and Court Order
https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/settlement-agreement-executed-parties
Page 36
2. Defendants shall maintain the existing Milwaukee Collaborative Community Committee to seek community input on police department operations to improve trust between law enforcement and city residents. Defendants shall consult with Plaintiffs regarding any changes in or additions to the membership of this group. Defendants shall make reasonable efforts to ensure that the membership in this committee represents racially and ethnically diverse communities, persons with disabilities, LGBTQ persons, and other protected classes.
Page 41
2. In preparing any Report, the Consultant may solicit reports and input from the Parties and community members through customary means of public notice employed by the FPC, including its website and an opt-in email distribution list including members of the public who are participating in the ongoing process, managed by the City, FPC, and MPD, to elicit public input concerning MPD reforms related to the proposed recommendations by the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit the Parties from providing reports and input for the Consultant’s consideration and the Consultant shall consider any such reports and input provided by the Parties when putting together a Report. Any reports and input provided by the Parties to the Consultant shall be provided at the same time to the opposing Party’s counsel.
It looks, to me anyway, that the work of the Milwaukee Community Collaborative Committee is not “a completely separate process”.
I hope you’all won’t think I’m going crazy over here — just talking to myself…
I am reviewing the findings from the Milwaukee Collaborative Reform Initiative Community Feedback Portal at https://city.milwaukee.gov/mkecr/Findings
It is notable how many of the Findings and Recommendations in this report appear almost verbatim in the form of requirements for the defendants in the ACLU Settlement Agreement and Court Order.
https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/settlement-agreement-executed-parties
I could fill pages with examples but it is more important that the Community read these documents and understand for themselves how closely they do in fact fit together. Don’t take my word for it: read the Court Order and then go through the Milwaukee Collaborative Reform Initiative Community Feedback Portal (aka Milwaukee Collaborative Community Committee) recommendation by recommendation, finding by finding, and note for yourselves just how closely the two are related.
Please, let’s work together on this!