Columbus councilmen and the mayor voted Tuesday to create a permanent oversight board for the Columbus Police Department.
The city’s six councilmen, when voting on whether to move forward with creating the proposed board, tied 3-3. Mayor Robert Smith broke the tie, voting to establish the board, which will consist of the mayor, two or three councilmen and six citizens, with one appointed from each ward.
The board’s creation was one of six recommendations brought to the council Tuesday by a recently-formed committee tasked with reviewing work done by the CPD special operations group.
Members of the special operations group, or SOG, were involved in the shooting death of Columbus resident Ricky Ball on Oct. 16. The committee reviewed the SOG’s body camera footage, arrests and traffic stops during the six months leading up to the Ball incident.
The committee, after conducting its review, brought its recommendation to the council Tuesday.
One of the recommendations was the creation of the CPD oversight board.
The board, among other things, will play a role in reviewing police-to-community performance; help construct a policy on excessive force; ensure a transparent complaint process; ensure a fair and thorough investigation of the officers involved in the Ball incident; and oversee community/police mentoring programs, such as the citizen police academy.
The council knotted into two ties on the board’s creation. The first came on a proposal form Ward 3 Councilman Charlie Box to table the matter for further discussion. The second came while voting on the recommendation itself.
Ward 1 Councilman Gene Taylor, Ward 4 Councilman Marty Turner and Ward 5 Councilman Kabir Karriem voted against tabling the recommendation and in favor of approving it. Ward 2 Councilman Joseph Mickens, Ward 6 Councilman Bill Gavin and Box voted in favor of tabling the matter and against approving it.
Smith voted to break the tie both times in favor of moving forward with the recommendation’s approval.
Box, Gavin and Mickens said they had concerns that the committee could venture too far into micromanaging the police department. Box said state law prohibits the council from micromanaging police department affairs.
Mickens said city leadership already had a reputation for micromanaging the police department and he did not want to add to that.
“I don’t want this committee to micromanage the police chief,” Mickens said. “Let this man do his job, because he’s going to be getting phone calls at night from everybody on this committee. I know what’s going on. That chief that comes here needs to be his own person — not to micromanage him. What I’m looking at is some micromanaging.”
Gavin said he’s been through three police chiefs in six years on the council and does not want to put undue oversight on the city’s new chief.
“I don’t think it’s micromanaging,” Turner said. “It’s transparency. We have to remember that the police are there to protect and serve us just like the mayor and council are here to serve and protect the citizens of Columbus. The police have the same role that we have. This is not micromanaging, it’s just transparency.”
As an advisory board, the board would only be able to make recommendations to the city council.
Other recommendations
Kamal Karriem and Lavonne Harris — both members of the SOG review committee — presented five other recommendations to the council. All of the recommendations had received majority consent from review committee members and support from CPD Interim Chief Fred Shelton.
One of the recommendations was to disband the SOG, which the city has already done.
The other four recommendations were all accepted unanimously by the city council.
The four recommendations were:
■ Adequate training of body camera operations for all officers and their supervisors;
■ Synchronizing audio and video recordings from body cameras;
■ Establishing penalties for body camera-related violations by officers and their supervisors (first offense, 10 days without pay; second offense, 30 days without pay or termination; third offense, termination);
■ Establishing penalties for illegal ride-alongs in CPD vehicles (first offense, 10 days without pay; second offense, 15 days without pay; third offense, termination).
Gavin asked about the difference in severity for a second offense for ride along violation compared to body camera policy violations. Gavin said he thought the ride along policy is just as important to the city as its body camera policy.
“If someone has an unauthorized person in the vehicle and that vehicle is involved in an automobile accident and that person’s injured, it puts the city at a very high risk there,” he said. “There’s 15 days difference between the two. In my opinion, I think it’s pretty strong in there too to have somebody unauthorized in the vehicle with them — especially the second time.”
Alex Holloway was formerly a reporter with The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 47 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 47 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
