The Cincinnati
Enquirer
Improving Police-Community Relations in Cincinnati: A Collaborative
Approach
By Jay Rothman, Fall 2003 issue
History was made in Cincinnati on April 11, 2002. On that
date, representatives of the City of Cincinnati, its police
officers, and its citizens signed an agreement that set a
path for a new era of cooperation between the police and the
community. Just one year previously, serious racial unrest
broke out in that city after the shooting of an unarmed African-American
youth by a police officer.
Lawsuits against police departments are filed in many American
cities these days, and investigations into police practices
by the U.S. Department of Justice are occurring in a number
of jurisdictions as well. Both of those processes began in
Cincinnati early in 2001, but only in Cincinnati have a broad
spectrum of citizens-and rank-and-file police officers themselves-participated
directly in a comprehensive and collaborative process for
improving police-community relations.
This unique journey began in May 2001 when Federal Judge Susan
J. Dlott signed an order establishing a collaborative process
to engage the community in working out an alternative to a
win-lose lawsuit that alleged a pattern of “racial profiling”
(or biased-based policing) by the Cincinnati Police Department.
Instead of a trial on the specifics of the case, the collaborative
was intended to address broader social conflicts in the city
by soliciting the views of as many citizens as possible and
establishing goals that would improve the relationship between
police officers and the community. These goals, the judge’s
order stated, must be addressed in any final collaborative
agreement.
Judge Dlott had previously been a domestic relations attorney.
In that role she developed the strong conviction that in issues
with such deep emotional content, like domestic relations
and racial issues, the court of law would not be the best
first stop on the way to a lasting solution. Rather, she felt
people would need to be deeply engaged in defining and solving
such problems themselves. This is how I came to be asked to
serve as the Judge’s special master and to organize and facilitate
this broadly inclusive, problem solving process.
Ultimately, more than 3,500 citizens shared their goals for
police-community relations, why they thought those goals were
important, and how they would achieve the goals. They set
a new agenda for their future that was ultimately translated
into a legal settlement agreement and ratified with a specific
set of plans, timelines and budget for implementation and
monitoring. Questionnaires were gathered in eight segments
of the community: African-Americans, whites, youth, leaders
of religious organizations and social service agencies, business
and foundation leaders, educators, police and their families,
city employees, and other minority groups (for more details
on this process and substantive outcomes please refer to www.ariagroup.com/cinti.html).
At a series of public meetings, representatives of each of
the eight groups eventually synthesized nearly 10,000 solutions
suggested by the community into dozens of consensus goals
and finally ratified a slate of five summary goals to be addressed
in the final agreement. Those goals are:
1. Police officers and community members will become proactive
partners in community
problem solving.
2. Build relationships of respect, cooperation, and trust
within and between police and
communities.
3. Improve education, oversight, monitoring, hiring practices,
and accountability of the
Cincinnati Police Department.
4. Ensure fair, equitable, and courteous treatment for all.
5. Create methods to establish the public’s understanding
of police policies and
procedures, and recognition of exceptional
service, in an effort to foster support for
the police.
The themes and values embodied in these goals are expressed,
directly and indirectly, throughout the Collaborative Agreement.
The Agreement was signed by the Black United Front, the American
Civil Liberties Union, the Fraternal Order of Police, and
the City of Cincinnati. Building directly on the five goals
proposed by the citizens, these four bodies-known as “the
parties”-agreed that the ultimate goal of their collaboration
is to reduce the friction that has existed between some members
of the community and some members of the city’s police force,
to create a safer community, and to foster mutual trust and
respect between citizens and police.
At the same time, the city and the Justice Department reached
a Memorandum of Agreement to improve police operations and
establish policies and procedures in such areas as use of
force, training, and discipline of officers. Both agreements
will be linked and overseen by a single independent monitor
for the next five years (e.g. until the year 2007).
The Collaborative Agreement
The agreement begins with a Value Statement. Different groups
in a community may have different experiences and perspectives,
the statement says, but they have much more in common, can
share the same goals, and can work together to solve problems.
The agreement then sets out a way for the different groups
to work together and to evaluate their progress.
Community Problem Oriented Policing.
Policing has traditionally been about the enforcement of
existing laws. It is often reactive and emphasizes punishment.
While recognizing that law enforcement remains a possible
answer to troublesome circumstances in the community, the
Collaborative Agreement offers a different approach: Community
Problem Oriented Policing, or CPOP. During the process that
led to this agreement, citizens across all of the participating
groups expressed a strong desire for more positive interaction
between police and the public. Under CPOP, all parties to
the agreement will help the police and community work together
to address such problems as crime, disorder, and quality of
life issues in Cincinnati, and all parties will be held accountable
for implementing CPOP. The city is required to come up with
a plan for involving a number of city agencies, in addition
to the police, in community problem solving.
This is how CPOP will work: Those “troublesome circumstances”-patterns
of crime or victimization, for example-are seen as problems
to be solved. But first they must be carefully defined and
analyzed using data, intelligence, and community input. Then
the police and their partners search for solutions that may
require the participation of other city agencies, community
members, and the private sector. Finally, these efforts are
evaluated to assess whether the problem has been reduced.
In short, CPOP is about the police and the community joining
together in ways that are participatory, preventative, proactive
and problem solving.
Requirements for implementing CPOP include documentation
of problem-solving activities and dissemination of these efforts
throughout the police department and to the public; CPOP training
for community groups; and recognition of citizens, police
officers, and other public officials who make substantial
contributions to addressing community problems in Cincinnati.
Evaluating the Implementation of the Agreement.
The agreement requires that all the parties, under the supervision
of the independent monitor, develop a system to track their
progress in reaching the goals. The tracking system amounts
to a “mutual accountability plan,” meaning that the conduct
of the city, the police administration, members of the police
department, and members of the general public are closely
observed and that all favorable and unfavorable conduct is
documented and then used to improve police-community relations.
However, instead of focusing on “compliance” and “enforcement”
of the agreements the operative notion here is instead “continuous
improvement” and “mutual accountability.” Just as in policing,
coercive enforcement of laws is always an option, and often
a necessary one, so too in this agreement parties will be
held to high standards. However, in both the preferred route
is a willing and problem-solving partnership to reach the
shared goals of improving police-community relations and ensuring
safety together.
The evaluation will include surveys of citizens and police
officers and observations of police-citizen interactions.
Official police records will be compiled by race, gender,
age, neighborhood, etc., for-among other categories-arrests,
vehicle and pedestrian stops, and reports of both favorable
and unfavorable conduct on the part of citizens and police
officers.
An annual report will be published using these and other
data to answer 35 specific questions that address the concerns
expressed by city officials, police officers, and community
members. For example: Is public safety improved throughout
the City of Cincinnati? Are citizen complaint processes and
discipline outcomes perceived to be fair by involved citizens
and officers? Were persons of any particular race or national
origin, gender, or age… subjected to a disproportionate share
of use of force by the police? What has been done to help
the police respond to the citizens in a more respectful manner?
What has been done to help the citizens respond to the police
in a more respectful manner? Has safety for both officers
and the community been enhanced?
Bias-Free Policing.
Under the agreement, the city agrees to provide police services
in a fair, impartial manner without discriminating on the
basis of race, color, or ethnicity and already has begun to
measure whether any racial disparity is occurring in police
stops of motor vehicles. All officers are expected to explain
to the citizen in a professional, courteous way why he or
she was stopped. The independent monitor’s reports will include
statistics on the race of all persons stopped (whether or
not that person is in a vehicle), detained, searched, arrested,
or involved in a use of force and the race of the officer
making the stop.
Looking Ahead
In her order establishing the collaborative, Judge Dlott anticipated
that the process would “provide an opportunity for the parties
and the court to create a national and international model for
other communities.” When Attorney General John Ashcroft came
to Cincinnati on April 12, 2001 to announce the settlement between
the city and the Justice Department, he acknowledged the “broad
community involvement” in that process and in the Collaborative
Agreement, saying “I…hope the spirit of cooperation and reconciliation
that led to these agreements can be replicated elsewhere. It
is our hope that jurisdictions will choose to follow the model
that has been established here in Cincinnati.” The ability
to make the model a success now rests with all the people
of Cincinnati. The tools are at their disposal. They will
determine whether the police-community relations envisioned
in their goals and laid out in the agreements become the norm
when the monitor leaves town after five years. They will determine
whether the culture of problem-solving takes root in Cincinnati
and abolishes the culture of blame.
In addition to the implementation of the legal agreements,
with judicial oversight, perhaps the most significant change
if this collaborative is ultimately successful, will be in
new sets of problem-solving attitudes, relationships and practices
that take root in Cincinnati. A Community Problem Solving
Center that will outlive the agreement is currently being
launched to ensure that a problem solving partnership evolves,
with police and community members involved and accountable.
Stay tuned!
Bio
Jay Rothman, Ph.D. is President of the ARIA Group in Yellow
Springs,, Ohio. He is a former Special Master to Federal Judge
Susan Dlott and former Director of the Cincinnati Police-Community
Relations Collaborative. The author wishes to thank the Andrus
Family Fund for sponsoring the research and writing of this
article and to acknowledge Janet Mandelstone of the Vera Institute
of Justice in New York City for her extensive contributions
to this piece.
Pullquotes
Instead of a trial on the specifics of the case, the collaborative
was intended to address broader social conflicts in the city
by soliciting the views of as many citizens as possible and
establishing goals that would improve the relationship between
police officers and the community.
Policing has traditionally been about the enforcement of
existing laws. It is often reactive and emphasizes punishment.
Printed in Reproduced here with permission
from the Association for Conflict Resolution
top |