PGHIMC - Pittsburgh Independent Media Center

Citizens debate dissolution of COP program
by Andy Mulkerin Wednesday, Nov. 13, 2002 at 2:51 PM
arm58@pitt.edu

Citizens debate Police Chief Robert McNeilly's plan to do away with the Community Oriented Policing program in its current form.

Citizens of the City of Pittsburgh expressed their feelings Tuesday evening, November 12, on a move that police chief Robert McNeilly plans to make regarding the restructuring of Community Oriented Policing (COP) in the department.

The public meeting, held in the city council chambers, was convened by the Citizen Police Review Board after they heard about the change, which McNeilly has already set to take place in January. The change takes away the title "Community Oriented Police" and removes COP supervisors from their position, putting the COP officers directly under the authority of the zone commanders.

McNeilly opened the meeting with his remarks on the subject, in which he likened himself to a football coach. He explained that if a coach decides to run the ball, the recievers will be angry, and if he decides to pass, the running back will be upset. Likewise, he says, he as a police chief must make policy decisions, all of which will please some people and upset others. He emphasized that in his opinion, the move will strengthen community policing by doing away with the idea that certain officers are community police ("Officer Friendly") while others are law enforcers ("the long arm of the law").

McNeilly said that while he hadn't called any public meetings on the subject of the COP reorganization, "we do listen to the public." He said the department gets plenty of feedback, both good and bad, from individuals in the community all the time.

When asked by Marsha Hinton, chair of the review board, McNeilly said he would take into consideration the comments made by members of the community at the meeting.

Presenting another case was Dr. Louis Mayo, Ph.D., a police management consultant from Alexandria, VA. Mayo offered his critique of the way most police departments are run, arguing that in order to be effective, police must take a much more holistic approach to their work.

He pointed out many common misconceptions about policework, most notably that "police are not generally in the crime business"-- meaning that most of the work officers do is not related to crimes that have been committed at all. He also pointed out that the two biggest stressors among the police population are conflicting policies at work and boredom. He said that community oriented policing addresses all the problems that he listed.

Mayo also pointed out that community oriented policing reduces the number of calls to police dispatchers because citizens are comfortable with addressing non-emergency matters directly toward their own community police officers.

Mayo emphasized that community-oriented policing does not refer to a single arm of a police department that is responsible for community matters- a point that didn't conflict with McNeilly's plan. Most of Mayo's discussion of the plan was not critical of the change in structure in the COP program; rather, he focused on the structure of the department as a whole, arguing that steps need to be taken to make the entire department community-oriented-- steps that he didn't see in the Pittsburgh plan.

Mayo's vision for community policing includes three integral parts: decentralization of command, participatory decision-making in the department, and geographic "teams" that get to know their constituents personally.

Citizens from Marshal-Shadeland, the East End, Brookline and Knoxville, among others, made statements regarding the proposed changes to the program.

Yvona Smith, principal of Lemington Elementary School, strongly criticized the move, demanding to know how it was determined that changes were needed in the program, since there were no public hearings held on the subject. McNeilly responded that the department gets constant feedback from the community, and that they get "mixed messages" about the COP program.

"What evaluating tool are you utilizing to determine unilaterally whether or not the program is working?" Smith asked, rephrasing her question.

McNeilly relpied that he never said that the program was not working, only that the structure put some officers in a friendly position with the community and others in an antagonistic position. He said that they could not poll every resident of the city on the matter anyway.

Joe Brown, of the Brightwood Civic Group, said that "it seems this is a done deal." But he insisted that there needs to be more community involvment among police and that the matter can't end with January. He noted that the COP officer in his neighborhood of Marshall-Shadeland "does an excellent job," and that he believes the chief is "jumping the gun" by taking this action without public comment.

Harry Liller said that the community wants COP, and that the city should spend more money on this program rather than hiring police to "help the rich people get back out of town after the Steelers and Penguins games."

As the meeting reached its crescendo, board members, most notably Rev. Johnnie Monroe, questioned McNeilly as to what would happen with the current COP officers in January when the COP program as it exists now is ended. McNeilly said that the zone commanders are responsible for assigning officers to their sectors, and he could not guarantee that a COP officer from a given area would end up back in that neighborhood.

Smith then spoke again, asserting that if the COP officers left the communities where they had been assigned previously, all the relationship building that she felt was the
most important acheivement of COP would "go down the hole."

Monroe also questioned the idea that the officers who will work most closely with the community once COP is dissolved will be "Community Problem Solving Officers"-- a name that he noted has a much more negative connotation.

The record remains open for written comments until next Tuesday, November 19 at 5:00 pm. They can be written and directed to the Citizen Police Review Board, 815 Fifth Avenue, Suite 400, Pittsburgh PA 15219. The CPRB's phone number is 412-765-8023. They can be reached by fax at 412-765-8059.

www.indypgh.org

add your comments