Editorial: Shutting down citizen police review boards would be a mistake

Floridians want to trust their local police departments, and they deserve that. In many Florida cities, that trust is bolstered by citizens’ oversight boards that review police shootings, evaluate residents’ complaints against individual officers and advise police departments.

So why do some legislators want to strip these boards of any ability to investigate and advise police departments on complaints — often serious complaints — about officers’ conduct?

That’s a good question, and one their constituents should be asking. Because from what we’re seeing, it seems more about protecting bad officers and, we suspect, kowtowing to police unions by stripping away transparency. Meanwhile, lawmakers are singing another chorus of a constant refrain, by trampling local officials’ ability to meet the needs they see firsthand.

A few justifications surfaced at Friday’s meeting of the House Local Administration, Federal Affairs and Special Districts Subcommittee, where HB 601 made its second stop. But they ring hollow.

Commentary: Lawmakers threaten environmental oversight and citizens’ rights

The basics of oversight

These boards have no power to discipline officers and must comply with the Florida Police Officers’ Bill of Rights, which spells out officers’ claims to due process and safeguards against self-incrimination. Yet they make a difference, for the better. Many residents will take complaints to a board of fellow citizens that they’d be afraid to address to the police department. Oversight boards can also look at trends and make policy suggestions to bridge gaps between police agencies, the LGBTQ community and other groups that have often felt marginalized.

That’s why we suggested last week that Orlando’s Citizens’ Police Review Board would be a good choice to monitor the city’s recent ordinance that would prohibit “disorderly conduct” on public sidewalks.

EDITORIAL: Orlando should monitor how its new disorderly conduct ordinance is used

St. Petersburg was the first city to set up a citizen’s oversight board in 1991. Orlando and Fort Lauderdale followed closely, in 1992 and 1993 respectively. Currently, 20 cities have police review boards, including Kissimmee and Ocoee.

Ignoring benefits

The bill’s sponsor, Jacksonville Republican Wyman Duggan, said he was concerned about creating uniform standards for police. He also claimed that he wasn’t really gutting the ability of oversight boards to serve the public, saying they could still examine trends and gauge community law enforcement needs.

Lisa Henning of the Florida State Fraternal Order of Police was even more candid about wanting oversight boards to be neutered. “You’re reinvestigating an officer that’s already been investigated …and cleared and now you’re pulling them back before a group of people who have no expertise in the job,” she told committee members.

Both ignored the reality that most law enforcement officers have plenty of protection already — and that citizens’ oversight boards often clear officers of wrongdoing. Citizens, however, can often feel defenseless. They’ve heard too many stories about complaints dropping into oblivion or drawing retaliation, and fear is often amplified in marginalized communities.

Burbeth Foster, senior counsel of Community Justice Partners, said investigations of individual claims of misconduct lead to far more significant insight into bigger problems. Agencies also benefit from improved relationships with the communities they serve. But the most important thing she had to say was this: By removing “bad apples” who taint the reputation of their departments, these boards also help good officers — by having their backs when complaints against them are unfounded and by giving them more credibility in the communities they want to serve and protect.

That’s backed up by a study released last year by the Leroy Collins Institute, finding that communities with oversight boards see less disparity in arrests of marginalized populations, fewer clashes between police and the public and safer communities — because people are more willing to trust the police.

‘I’m going to dump her’: Kissimmee police officers resigned while facing firing for excessive force

Citizens are far less likely to come forward when their complaints are cloaked in secrecy, investigated by the departments who have incentives to protect their own or relegated to far-distant offices at the Florida Department of Law Enforcement or state Attorney General’s office.

This oversight has been particularly helpful in Florida’s largest cities, most of which have review boards. But this is an option that should remain available to any local government that has seen flare-ups in tension between the police and the public.

It’s understandable that many representatives struggled with this bill, including Rep. Mike Gottlieb, D-Davie, who acknowledged a difficulty in recruiting law enforcement officers. He suggested a good compromise: A bill that would set standards and training requirements for police oversight boards, but preserve their ability to conduct individual reviews.

As this legislation moves forward, lawmakers should consider that as an option. Because this is about more than “backing the blue.” It’s about cutting off the ability of city officials to see a rift between their own police departments and the residents of their cities — and address growing tensions before anger, distrust and fear erupt into real violence.

Nobody wants that. Or at least, nobody should want that.

The Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board consists of Opinion Editor Krys Fluker, Editor-in-Chief Julie Anderson and Viewpoints Editor Jay Reddick. Contact us at insight@orlandosentinel.com