Page 10 - January 2021

SecondVice President’s Report
Year-end review of the Department’s “vision” and “mission” statement
What do you think: Has the Department accom- plished its “Mission” this year?
Well, let’s look at the total number of homicides. As I type this, heyjackass.com reflects 790 murders, with 717 of those killed by gunfire.
Per General Order G01-01, the Department’s “Vision” statement is: “That all people in the City of Chicago are safe, supported, and proud of the Chicago Police Department.” Per the same order, the Department’s “Mission” is: A. “To serve our
communities and protect the lives, rights, and property of all people in Chicago.” B. “The Department and all members will act in a unified manner to uphold the Vision, Mission Statement and Core Values.” C. “The Department’s response to emerging and chronic crime and disorder will be comprehensive and consistent with all aspects of the Mission Statement.”
I mean, can anyone reasonably say that the Department ac- complished its mission in 2020? Right now, city management is finding a way to blame the rank and file. To the rank and file: you have done your job to the best of your ability under the con- ditions in which you are forced to work.
Over the past year, the Department came up with a few “bright ideas.” In addition to forcing officers into training, against COVID restrictions, the Department reallocates officers on a daily basis.
Officers are continually stripped out of the districts they are assigned to, only to be placed downtown. These officers’ activ- ities are basically restricted to that of a Neighborhood Watch. Despite having passive-duty assignments downtown, weapons are still being recovered by officers. Just two weekends ago, of- ficers recovered seven illegal guns in the downtown area alone.
The media refuses to report any of this, but slowly, the tax- paying residents are realizing the effect of only having a handful of officers patrolling their entire district at any given time. One would think that the commanders in the districts would voice their concern to a higher authority to prevent being stripped of their manpower. Perhaps some have, but I assure you that they’ve been retaliated against in one way or another. You would think aldermen would also be furious that their police resourc- es are being reallocated to other parts of the city. But we have only seen and heard a small number of aldermen speak out.
As hundreds of officers are detailed to the downtown area each day, they can do nothing but stand and watch herds of “ju- bilant teens” run rampant (or, as our elected leaders say, “letting off steam”). They victimize decent citizens, they steal, they rob and they loot. Officers are then ordered to violate these urban terrorists’ constitutional rights by corralling them onto public transportation. On their free ride on the Red Line, the jubilant teens prey on more decent people who are most likely on their way home from work, or visiting from out of town. Pathetic.
This reallocation of manpower also creates serious officer safety issues within districts, but the City disagrees. For example: only two sworn officers are working in a district approximately nine square miles; one a beat officer, the other a sergeant. Both
10 CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ JANUARY 2021
working “99.” The officer is dispatched to essentially an active shooter call.
(Granted, in some neighborhoods, it’s common practice for callers to report people with guns, believing it will make police respond quicker. Unfortunately, these false calls go without arrest or prosecution, but that’s another story). The officer ac- knowledges the assignment and treats the call as if it is factual, like our officers do, despite routinely being dispatched to bogus gun calls.
Upon arrival, the responding officer is alone, and the only backup he is aware of is at the other end of the district. Poten- tially, the backup could take 20 minutes to respond if all traffic laws are obeyed. So, what does the assigned officer do? He does the job that the community would expect him to do; the offi- cer investigates the active shooter. The officer does not hear or see anything unusual as he approaches the reported location. Upon drawing closer, to the officer’s surprise, there is a person fitting the description of the offender.
The officer sees that nothing is in the suspect’s hands, so he reholsters. (The officer surely would not want allegations of pointing his gun at an unarmed man.) In a matter of a nanosec- ond, the offender responds to the officer holstering his weapon and draws his own gun. Surely, the officer has a dozen thoughts running through his mind, yet he acts appropriately. Thankfully, the officer was unharmed, but this could have been catastroph- ic in so many ways. (Since there is a pending criminal case, we won’t even begin to get into the offender’s background, but we struggle to understand how he was even enjoying his freedom.)
It’s encounters like these that stick with officers for eternity. Some officers learn from these encounters, some officers sharp- en their police skills and some are haunted. Regardless, just as city managers and the community ask in some instances, “How could this have been avoided,” we ask the same question. The logical and intelligent answer would be to properly allocate po- lice resources and manpower.
In addition to showing how valuable a few seconds are, it makes one realize the importance of at least having one addi- tional officer responding to high-risk assignments. It’s instances like these where we are compelled to think of new ways of re- sponding, just like the Department develops new ways to hold officers “accountable” for merely doing their jobs.
That being said, if a member receives a high-risk assignment and the Department has not provided the proper backup as re- ceived while in a training scenario, we remind members that they have the right to wait for the appropriate backup. We en- courage members to respond within a safe distance of the as- signment and advise the dispatcher of the location where the appropriate backup can meet. From that point, together, the officers can devise a plan to respond to the high-risk, priority assignment.
Come 2021, we hope the city managers and the Department focus on the mission as stated in the general order, with a focus on officer safety, since the order mentions nothing about it.
DAN GORMAN