Your turn: Rockford Civilian Oversight Board is 'a solution looking for a problem'

Recent interactions between residents and police generated murmurs and whispers regarding the established Civilian Oversight Board for the Rockford Police Department.

I am strongly opposed to the existence of this board. I’d like to reiterate why.

Civilian oversight boards are nothing new. They have been around since the 1900’s. There were around 40 in the 1980’s; now they number over 200. Why the increase?

My sense is that their increase is “stylish,” following a trend or a narrative to placate the Twitter-crowd that is unappeased by factual findings and are looking for a result that fits a narrative. There is a distinct difference between an examination of events or evidence to arrive at truth rather than investigating until one achieves the results they seek.

How many times have we heard locally of the findings of our department and or the integrity task force findings only to be berated by calls for a “federal investigation?”

Mark Twain said that “no power of evidence will ever persuade an idiot.”

Your turn: City Council is not meant for personal penance

Within the City of Rockford, our current system is effective, and this board is a solution looking for a problem. In the recent past, the department has effectively identified and addressed the rare police officer that has deficiencies.

The main driver for this board is a distrust of the police and their objectivity. I reject this premise and blanket indictment of all law enforcement. There will always be a vocal minority, who will disagree.

Citizens look for justice, openness, being forthright and objective. Law enforcement in this region does this. No one disputes that the citizens must be free to engage law enforcement and be heard. However, this can be done via existing conduits.

The stated goal is to reduce bias. “Objective” approval of civilian candidates was based the word of the selection committee that they went through the selection process without bias. What is magical about the selection committee and the members of this board that they will be without bias as opposed to the current existing processes already in place?

The question is, if we cannot trust that the internal review of the police department or the county Integrity/state integrity task force, the state’s attorney are without bias, why should we trust that this new board is without bias? Where does doubt end and trust begin? The creation of this Board states that there are no law enforcement officers that are capable of an insightful, objective just and thorough review of officer involved events.

I am concerned about the judgment of any civilian volunteering to be on this board.

I went through 8 years of training before anyone would allow me to independently put a scalpel on a patient. Two more years of work and study before I was fully boarded. That’s 10 years. It was only after another 10 years that I felt comfortable reviewing the work of other physicians. That’s 20 years of experience in medicine.

There was a story once told of ship that was put in dry-dock because there was a problem with the propeller turning — it appeared seized. The local engineers could not solve this dilemma. They called for an out of town expert who looked over the drive shaft. Then took out a mallet and struck the drive shaft. Low and behold the propeller turned when the engine was fired up.

The engineer then submitted his bill for $20,000. The ship owner was annoyed by such a large bill for a simple job and asked the engineer to justify his bill. The engineer said it was $10 for the mallet and $19,990 dollars for the training, years of experience that it took to know precisely where to swing the mallet.

Too often there are those who look at a task and either lack and/or not see the depth of insight it takes to do the job. It is my reason for objecting to the formation of this board.

Each one of us has a job, career. How may of us want to be reviewed by a board with minimal insight, no experience in the field and then show up and evaluate our performance … in a sense, randomly swing the hammer?

I just do not see any advantage of the creation of this board other than to satisfy the Twitterverse and the barstool erupters who protest first and think later.

This committee will be asked to assess the use of force things such as domestic violence and the chaos that ensues.

I have only seen people lose control in an ER. It’s usually one individual in a closed environment and there were no weapons.

On the streets, scenes are rapidly evolving, chaotic and virtually impossible to control.

No civilian board, no matter how they are oriented (and this distinction must be made — they are not trained, only oriented) will have the insight for effective evaluation.

Anyone can be a Monday morning quarterback and make the right call in slow motion. How would you like surgery performed on you by one so “trained?’

The question then arises as to what happens if this board disagrees with the internal affairs of the police department or the integrity task force … do we create a third committee as a tie breaker? Are their conclusions enforceable? Do they land up in the officer’s employment file? Since they will be made public, can they be legally used in an action against the city and the police officer? Is the state’s attorney obligated to review their report?

The over creation of committees or boards give an organization the feel of weakness and are used by politicians to deflect responsibility.

It is my belief that at some point in time, when the spell breaks, folks will realize that the creation of this committee was inappropriate and ineffective. Reimagine Rockford.

Dr. Timothy Durkee represents the city's 1st Ward on the Rockford City Council.

This article originally appeared on Rockford Register Star: Your turn: Rockford does not need a Civilian Oversight Board