MINNEAPOLIS, MN — Talk of disbanding the Minneapolis Police Department has moved from Twitter to the official meeting of the City Council, which on Friday approved the first step toward six key areas of police reform.
Any path toward a disbanding — or what other councilmembers called a “dismantling” — of the police department will run into a host of obstacles, from the city charter to union representation to state laws. To start, at issue during Friday’s emergency meeting of the City Council was a motion seeking a temporary restraining order on six “immediate” changes, including the banning of chokeholds. However, the restraining order still requires a judge’s approval before the provisions are enforceable in court.
The proposed order is the result of negotiations between the city and the Minnesota Department of Human Rights, which this week announced a civil rights investigation into the police abuses related to the killing of George Floyd. Along with the immediate demands, the order proposes rules for the city’s cooperation with that investigation, including protections against retaliation against whistleblowers.
Here are the specific reforms approved by City Council Friday, which, again, are not yet enforceable.
1. Ban Chokeholds
Chokeholds and neck-restraints — such as the one used by former Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin when he knelt on the neck of George Floyd — would be banned for any reason. These techniques are currently permitted under the department’s Policy and Procedure Manual.
Since 2015, analysis of Minneapolis use-of-force data shows that officers used various chokeholds at least 237 times, rendering 44 suspects unconscious; in 29 of those cases, the suspect being choked to unconsciousness was a black person.
2. Duty To Report
The next two reforms concern what happens after an officer witnesses an abuse. In a presentation to the City Council, Department of Human Rights Commissioner Rebecca Lucero summarized the current policy, noting that the responsibility to report an unauthorized use of force isn’t an immediate one; rather, “the onus is on the person who uses force.”
“What this changes,” Lucero continued, “is if an officer observes a colleague using any unauthorized force, that officer must report that incident while still on the scene to the commander or commander’s superior.”
But under these reforms, officers wouldn’t just be court-mandated reporters: They’d be mandated interveners.
3. Duty To Intervene
The three officers who stood by while Derek Chauvin spent nearly nine minutes with his knee on Floyd’s neck now face criminal charges for abetting unintentional second-degree murder and aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter. Still, officers already have a duty to intervene under existing police policy, but this “general” duty isn’t strong enough, Lucerne told the council members.
Under this provision, any officer, “regardless of tenure or rank,” who sees another Minneapolis cop use unauthorized force “must attempt to safely intervene by verbal and physical means.”
The order also includes a penalty for failing to intervene, which Lucerne described as “additional teeth” beyond existing police policy. According to the order, if an officer stands by and does nothing, “[they] shall be subject to discipline to the same severity as if they themselves engaged in the prohibited use of force.”
4. Crowd Control
Minneapolis protests have seen widespread police use of tear gas, pepper spray and other “crowd control” munitions. Under this stipulation, a police order to deploy such weapons, “must be authorized only by the Chief of Police” or a designee at the rank of Deputy Chief or above. Under current police policy, all it takes is a supervisor to order the use of tear gas.
“This doesn’t mean that crowd control measures won’t be used,” Lucerne said during the presentation, “it just means the decision must rest with the chief.”
5. Timely Discipline Decisions
Police records on discipline are often opaque and difficult for the public to acquire. Part of the problem, Lucerne said, is that the Minneapolis’ police department regularly fails to make disciplinary decisions within the 45-day timeframe laid out in its own policy manual.
Click Here: new zealand rugby team jerseys
“There is a backlog of these decisions,” Lucerne said. “We need these cleaned up. Someone claims about a situation that occurs, and [the Office of Police Conduct Review] finds merit, we need action, immediately; It cannot languish.”
Under the proposed order, the department would have 45 days to clean up its backlog, and a 30-day timeframe would be imposed on all future disciplinary decisions. According to the order, once a disciplinary decision has been issued, “a written memorandum will be immediately made available to the public via the City’s website and must also be available for physical inspection.”
6. Bodycam Footage Review
The Office of Police Conduct Review, or OPCR, evaluates citizen complaints against the department. Under this provision, the office would gain the power “to proactively and strategically audit body worn camera footage.”
“Right now,” Lucerne said, “Body cam footage exists. However, it’s only reviewed when there’s a complaint.”
Under the provision, all camera footage would be audited by non-police analysts within OPCR.
The proposed reforms and request for a temporary restraining order passed the City Council by a vote Friday afternoon. It was then signed by Mayor Jacob Frey.
“This is a moment in time where we can totally change the way our police department operates,” Frey said after the vote. “We can quite literally lead the way in our nation enacting more police reform than any other city in the entire country and we cannot fail.”