The issue of Chief's Olson's competence falls into two categories. As:
1) ...mismanagement of the department (I know nothing really about this)
and mishandling of public complaints about the behavior of his officers. The
latter has proven to be knee-jerk support for the men and women who
themselves always want to oust their chief.
Still, never in the history of police hierarchies has the rank and file been
happy with their chief, especially responsible ones who weigh the police
ethos with that of the rest of the world, not the least of which are the
politics of City Hall. He's the boss and it's always in to bash the boss,
even if he emerges from the rank and file. Sometimes more resentment arises
from that than from an outsider's hiring. Peers don't relish peers becoming
their superiors, despite officers' demands that the chief do rise from their
ranks.
2) ...a mask for the more serious underlying danger embodied in what has
become an internal culture almost totally disengaged from the rest of the
community and always engaged in the reinforcement of base bigotry and racism
among the majority rank and file officers.
Mayor Rybak (and the Council) must make monumental decisions about both,
careful not to allow the first to pass without scrutiny, but not to withdraw
from it simply because the second cannot be the chief's fault alone. If
there's good reason to dismiss this chief for Number One, do it.
But tackling Number Two should be the prime concern of all elected officials
in this city and every city where cops have the power and firepower to scare
the hell out of them. If elected officials back away from their public
responsibility to make that culture more responsive to and more
representative of the community they serve based on the fear that political
blackmail will ruin them, then we'd be better off if they, too, were exposed
(as they slowly appear to being in Minneapolis).
It strikes me that the primary reason people are backing away from
supporting the buying out of the chief is that they fail to see him as the
sole reason for indiscriminate violence by street officers when they
overreact to mentally ill men and women or get too boisterous after a hockey
victory.
But Olson can and does set the tone for permissiveness in his department and
because his charter-mandated contract (unlike any other department head)
cuts across mayoral terms (rather than concurrent and at-will service). His
failure to help convert the police culture to a community-wise and community
ownership style of policing is fodder for firing, in my view, but does not
bail out the city from its responsibility to address this disengagement and
occupying force issue from the policy agenda.
Andy Driscoll
Saint Paul
------
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied
corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of
strength, and bid defiance to the laws of the country."
--- Thomas Jefferson,1816
> From: Alan Shilepsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 08:41:00 -0500
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [Mpls] Olson buyout erodes
>
> For the record, I support the Mayor's concern about the Police Chief and
> his--the Mayor's--exploration of ways to expedite a change in Police
> leadership. During the closing year of the ancien regime it was a
> mistake to re-up the Chief for three years, in the face of strongly
> expressed dissent, and now it will be detrimental to the city to have a
> lame duck (and widely denigrated) Chief for 20 more months.
>
> I think our Mayor has articulated several weaknesses of the present
> Chief. The Mayor said the Chief has not been helpful in the budget
> trimming work that all City Departments have had to undertake. The
> Mayor also said that the Chief has not been around to publically explain
> (or defuse or apologize for?) the several incidents where his Department
> has been widely criticized for over zealous if not inappropriate and
> overly violent responses to a mentally ill man, Critical Mass, and the
> Gopher victory turmoil. The Mayor or Police PR people shouldn't have to
> do it.
>
> I am surprised that the Council does not see a serious problem with the
> Chief's management (or lack of management) of the Department.
>
> Anyway, if we have to orbit for another 20 months before we can get a
> Chief who can win the respect of the officers and of our diverse
> communities, I hope the Mayor and Council make sure the current Chief is
> put to work on those things that he is good at AND that move the ball
> down the field. Since he is likely a short-termer I wonder why,
> according to the Stribe, he is "headed to Washington, D.C., to meet with
> federal officials to discuss efforts to counter terrorism." Let's send
> people who will be around awhile.
> I'd say, let's heighten the visibility and authority of our Inspectors
> and Deputy Chief(s) for a while (sort of extended job interviews?), and
> get the Chief riding a desk and spending more time on the budget
> trimming assignment that he apparently has been avoiding.
>
> Alan Shilepsky
> Downtown
> _______________________________________
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
> Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
> http://e-democracy.org/mpls
>
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
