Page 21 - May2021

of Police Powers: Limited Authority to Relieve and Creation of Appeal,” in which he warned: “Relieving Department mem- bers of police powers is an incredibly serious matter which has profound impact on the member and the Department. The authority to relieve a member of police powers should reside with one member of the senior Command Staff, who will be held accountable for their decision and who understands the significance of this action...The decision to relieve a member of police powers will only be taken in the most egregious circum- stances, and only after careful consideration.”
Most will recall that in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic ravaging the country, the state and the City last year, Chicago citizens took to the streets beginning on May 26, 2020, as a re- sponse to George Floyd’s death. The mayor of Chicago, along with the mayors of 12 other major cities, declared curfews in order to prevent looting and vandalism — all to no avail. In- deed, on May 31, 2020, Mayor Lightfoot asked Governor Pritz- ker to send the Illinois National Guard to Chicago for the first time in 52 years — since the 1968 riots in Chicago — given the violence, looting and destruction in Chicago’s streets.
During that time, the mayor herself and other community groups demanded that various police officers allegedly en- gaged in mild confrontations with the public during those ri- ots be stripped. Indeed, in one such incident involving a ver- bal altercation with hand gestures (note: no excessive force, no officer-involved shooting, no indictment, no felony crime), the “outraged” mayor went on national television and pontif- icated as follows: “[I]n my view, that person needs to be im- mediately stripped of their police power and start the process for firing him.” The FOP presented additional evidence to the Labor Board investigator that the Department took similar ac- tions against several other police officers stemming from the
protests for conduct which, in the past, never resulted in police officers getting stripped. The superintendent wasted no time in complying with the mayor’s mandate.
None of the examples presented to the board rose to the lev- el of “the most egregious circumstances” that would warrant the decision to relieve them of police powers; rather, it appears no consideration took place, let alone “careful consideration,” other than the mayor’s desire to set an example. The Depart- ment’s departure in stripping officers in 2020 evidences a stark change in the practice as to how police officers are disciplined.
In order to prove the City’s violation, on June 12, 2020, the FOP further made a formal, written request to obtain copies of documents identifying those police officers the Department had relieved of police powers over the past three years. Not sur- prisingly, the Department refused. It’s interesting how the City and Department are quick to release documents and informa- tion to the public immediately when it suits their purpose, but reluctant when they are legally and contractually obligated to do so based upon the FOP’s request.
For now, I am cautiously optimistic that the City may be will- ing to see the errors of its way and recognize the importance of not having a knee-jerk reaction when it comes to officers’ alleged misconduct. Policies, procedures and due process exist for the benefit of everyone and cannot be changed unilaterally. To quote the mayor: “It’s a big deal to strip somebody of their police powers. And there’s got to be a good justification for do- ing it.” Without following an established process, her words will ring hollow. As an aside, while this article is off to print, the FOP received word from the City’s attorney that the Department is now willing to provide the documents requested — albeit al- most one year later.
CHICAGO LODGE 7 ■ MAY 2021 21