@sstrudeau cc: @MayorTaylorA2. Something we can do about police brutality and misconduct here in Ann Arbor.
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 I just pulled up the agreement and will try to review it tonight.
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 A few thoughts: The biggest thing that jumped out at me was in 5.2, which says "If the employee is unable to reply accurately, he/she will have the opportunity to review the appropriate written records before responding." /1
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 The entire paragraph is poorly written provision, but in context I assume the "reply accurately" language refers to the officer's reply to questions asked in the investigation of his/her misconduct. /2
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 And "appropriate written records" could refer to written reports from eyewitnesses to the disputed incident, for example. /3
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 In other words, it's possible that this provision allows officers to make sure they conform their answers to the written record and/or respond in a way that is designed to cast doubt on what eyewitnesses said, or otherwise make their answers sound credible. /4
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 (That would fall under the "Gives Officers Unfair Access to Information" column in the checkthepolice.org materials.) /5
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 I noticed two things that fall under the "Limits Oversight/Discipline" column. First, when considering what punishment to impose, 5.4 prohibits the supervisor from considering any infractions that occurred more than 24 months before the incident under review. /6
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 In other words, if an officer had a bunch of infractions, but managed to not get into trouble for 24 months, and then has another misconduct allegation sustained, the punishment for that latest allegation can't consider the earlier sustained complaints. /7
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 Second, the checkthepolice.org document calls out contracts that permit officers to overturn discipline through binding arbitration. /8
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 It looks like this contract does that: 5.8 says officers can use the grievance procedure to appeal a disciplinary decision, and 6.3(f) says that grievance procedures eventually end up in binding arbitration, if not settled before then. /9
@sstrudeau @MayorTaylorA2 That's my very quick read. /fin
