More to the point: “You cannot have police accountability if the public is prohibited from understanding and changing how the system works.” Hiding that information is ludicrous. There should be NOTHING secret about how a City peace officer operates. Frankly, the fact that they think something should be secret is core to the problems of the force. What conceivable process, outside of training to trick suspects into giving up information, could possibly need to be secret? The number of drive-bys each patrol makes in a round? Where the best radar traps work? My guess is that almost every practice of a police force is already available in hundreds of publicly accessible text books on the subject. What do they really think they are hiding? Do we really think they are hiding something that public knowledge might harm? Protecting personal privacy of the officer (not the public one) seems to be as far as this nonsense needs to go. Go get 'em, Bob. This stupidity needs to stop.
Kurt: This is not the Portland Police Bureau or its officers trying to hide information. It is the city bureaucracy, attorney's office, and a council majority that is doing that. All the police officers I know want the accountability board to be as transparent as possible, letting the public know how it operates.
I filed a lawsuit against the City of Portland today to defend the public's right to speak and to know.
Portlanders voted for a police accountability system built on independence, transparency, and public trust. We were promised a watchdog—not a body operating under City Hall’s thumb.
The case asks a simple question: Can the City hide public information behind a blanket of secrecy that the Oregon Constitution does not allow?
I filed this case because Portlanders deserve a government that honors the Charter they voted for, respects the Constitution that protects them, and trusts them with the truth. .
The real question is not whether I remain on a board. The question is whether citizens must surrender their voice in order to serve their community.
This case is not about my voice. It is about whether the City can take yours.
"The case asks a simple question: Can the City hide public information behind a blanket of secrecy that the Oregon Constitution does not allow?"
And a cascade of questions flows from that, one of the most important being who is calling the shots behind the scenes and by what authority?
Did the City Council create a governance structure for the Board and appoint city employees to staff it? If so, where are the by-laws or their equivalent and the organizational chart? Who came up with the restrictions on the flow of information that were reduced to writing in the nondisclosure agreement, and why? An attorney typically would not make policy decisions of the kind implemented by the NDA. Where are the minutes of the meetings that resulted in the creation of the controversial nondisclosure agreement? Are the minutes, if any exist, also considered confidential? And so on . . .
Excellent and it's about time. I commend you Bob! You are a role model for all of us who believe in honest, transparent government and accountability for public officials. Only authoritarians hide behind nondisclosure agreements, which they use to keep their machinations out of the eyes of the voting public.
Mitch Green and his lackeys need to be voted out of office.
It is a sign of insecurity and thus a need for control that usually is behind keeping public transactions secret. The majority of this council is inexperienced and far too driven by external ideological concerns. Occasionally they stub their toe on facts and rarely know what to do with them. Like understanding how lower tax value on real estate results in less tax revenue.
By statute this board is going to have a budget based on a percentage of the overall police budget. That funding should create the ability to communicate its work, stand by its decisions, and not need the public to get a decoder ring to find out what is going on.
Bob, thank you for being willing to take this on and the rest of should support you by making sure we elect a better set of District 4 Council member this fall.
We all ready to vote Mitch Green out this year?
More to the point: “You cannot have police accountability if the public is prohibited from understanding and changing how the system works.” Hiding that information is ludicrous. There should be NOTHING secret about how a City peace officer operates. Frankly, the fact that they think something should be secret is core to the problems of the force. What conceivable process, outside of training to trick suspects into giving up information, could possibly need to be secret? The number of drive-bys each patrol makes in a round? Where the best radar traps work? My guess is that almost every practice of a police force is already available in hundreds of publicly accessible text books on the subject. What do they really think they are hiding? Do we really think they are hiding something that public knowledge might harm? Protecting personal privacy of the officer (not the public one) seems to be as far as this nonsense needs to go. Go get 'em, Bob. This stupidity needs to stop.
Kurt: This is not the Portland Police Bureau or its officers trying to hide information. It is the city bureaucracy, attorney's office, and a council majority that is doing that. All the police officers I know want the accountability board to be as transparent as possible, letting the public know how it operates.
Thank you for identifying them more concretely. Now that you know who the culprits are, good luck and make it right - for the rest of us. .
I filed a lawsuit against the City of Portland today to defend the public's right to speak and to know.
Portlanders voted for a police accountability system built on independence, transparency, and public trust. We were promised a watchdog—not a body operating under City Hall’s thumb.
The case asks a simple question: Can the City hide public information behind a blanket of secrecy that the Oregon Constitution does not allow?
I filed this case because Portlanders deserve a government that honors the Charter they voted for, respects the Constitution that protects them, and trusts them with the truth. .
The real question is not whether I remain on a board. The question is whether citizens must surrender their voice in order to serve their community.
This case is not about my voice. It is about whether the City can take yours.
"The case asks a simple question: Can the City hide public information behind a blanket of secrecy that the Oregon Constitution does not allow?"
And a cascade of questions flows from that, one of the most important being who is calling the shots behind the scenes and by what authority?
Did the City Council create a governance structure for the Board and appoint city employees to staff it? If so, where are the by-laws or their equivalent and the organizational chart? Who came up with the restrictions on the flow of information that were reduced to writing in the nondisclosure agreement, and why? An attorney typically would not make policy decisions of the kind implemented by the NDA. Where are the minutes of the meetings that resulted in the creation of the controversial nondisclosure agreement? Are the minutes, if any exist, also considered confidential? And so on . . .
Excellent and it's about time. I commend you Bob! You are a role model for all of us who believe in honest, transparent government and accountability for public officials. Only authoritarians hide behind nondisclosure agreements, which they use to keep their machinations out of the eyes of the voting public.
Mitch Green and his lackeys need to be voted out of office.
"Non-disclosure agreement"????
Why would the City have that, unless they were trying to hide something??
Do you mean like the animus against law enforcement that is apparent in the political DNA of the Community Board for Police Accountability?
Wahoo!
It is a sign of insecurity and thus a need for control that usually is behind keeping public transactions secret. The majority of this council is inexperienced and far too driven by external ideological concerns. Occasionally they stub their toe on facts and rarely know what to do with them. Like understanding how lower tax value on real estate results in less tax revenue.
By statute this board is going to have a budget based on a percentage of the overall police budget. That funding should create the ability to communicate its work, stand by its decisions, and not need the public to get a decoder ring to find out what is going on.
Bob, thank you for being willing to take this on and the rest of should support you by making sure we elect a better set of District 4 Council member this fall.