NEWS DAY | Policing the police in Minneapolis

File a complaint with the Civilian Review Authority in Minneapolis and you may never hear what happens to it. That’s not the choice of the CRA, reports MinnPost, it’s the result of “a 2007 memo by the city attorney’s office that said state data practices law means that the CRA can’t release ’status information” on cases.”

The Minnesota Daily described police federation requests leading to the city attorney’s memo, and current legal challenges to the enforced secrecy.

Current and former members say the inability to release this information to the public severely cripples the Authority’s ability to perform effective civilian oversight of Minneapolis police.

Twenty-one months after the meeting , a community watchdog group led by a University of Minnesota employee sued the city for violating state data laws . A Hennepin County judge ruled on the case earlier this month, siding mostly with the city, and an appeal is in the works.

The only time that a complainant can hear what happened is if the Minneapolis Police Department actually disciplines an officer as a result of a complaint. And that, CRA members told MinnPost, almost never happens.

“We see things that should be an early warning to the police department that there are problems,” said Dave Bicking, one of the Unappreciated Seven on the board. “That’s where we could have the most effect. If the police took seriously the problems that come before us, maybe they could prevent some of the bigger problems. But there’s little indication that they do that. Very few of the complaints we sustain result in discipline.”

Assistant chief of police Sharon Lubinski says CRA-referred cases are taken seriously, citing the numbers on 19 cases reaching her desk in the past year.

Of those, Lubinski says, she’s responded with discipline in four cases. Five cases were so old — dating back to 2005 — that discipline was not warranted, she said. And in 10 cases she ordered no discipline.

TC Daily Planet blogger Chuck Turchick points out another problem with the process, saying:

According to the ordinance, the Chief is supposed to base his disciplinary decision on “the adjudicated facts as determined by the civilian review authority board.” De novo review of the facts is prohibited.
But the CRA’s annual reports reflect a different story. The 2008 report, for example, says that among the reasons the Chief has given for his no-discipline decisions are “dispute with the facts contained in the hearing panel decision and insufficient evidence.” That seems to violate the ordinance. How could the Chief determine there was a “dispute with the facts” or the evidence was “insufficient” without looking at the evidence anew?

The CRA, which lives in the city’s Civil Rights Department, has a director, two investigators and a board that reviews complaints. Four of the eleven positions on the board are vacant. MinnPost says backlog is a problem, with 150 complaints filed in the first nine months of the year, creating an overload for the two investigators.

News with attitude, mostly from MN but with occasional forays abroad. News Day summarizes, links to, and comments on reports from news media around the world, with particular attention to Minnesota news.

Mary Turck

Mary Tuck is the editor of the TC Daily Planet.