LOCAL News :: Police State : Resistance & Tactics
Council votes to continue to do nothing about police spying (again)
the policeman spies
while the council does nothing
a winter leaf falls in the breeze
Click on image for a larger version
There was a motion before the city council proposed by councilmember Tony Madrigal to request an independent investigation into police spying. The council perhaps signalled it's intentions by placing the motion on the afternoon agenda of their regularly scheduled Tuesday meeting, rather than the more well-attended evening agenda.
There were a good many public speakers raising issues with the police internal audit and calling for the independent investigation. Additionally, people called for full disclosure of any past spying and for a strong binding ordinance limiting police powers to monitor political and community groups.
This was the first time that councilmembers expressed serious concern about police spying. Ed Porter and Tim Fitzmaurice spoke at length about their concerns.
Some speakers who had viewing the results of the ACLU Public Records Act request made it clear to the council that there was no question about who was involved in the police spying scandal. The real questions were what motivated them to do it, how extensive it is, and how we will make them stop.
The public records contain emails that show that most everyone in the police department management from Chief Howard Skerry to Deputy Chief Kevin Vogel on down to Lt. Rudy Escalante knew about the undercover officers. Additionally, there were communications to and from high-level police from the city manager's office, the downtown development association, and even Mayor Cynthia Mathews herself.
During the vote on Mr. Madrigal's motion, the discussion was hijacked by Mike Rotkin who made a long and circuitous counter-motion to do nothing until the results of the Internal Audit came back, making Mr. Madrigal's original motion moot. Councilmembers Fitzmaurice and Madrigal were still asking clarifying questions about the proposed counter motion when Ms. Mathews cut off discussion and called for a vote. Their were 3 councilmembers voting against Rotkin's proposal to do nothing. It passed, requiring the council to do nothing.
Then to add insult to injury, the original motion came to a vote, and lost 5 to 2, with Councilmembers Fitzmaurice and Madrigal voting against.
In short, the council voted again to do nothing and trust the police to police themselves. But we will not let up pressure until citizens can express their free speech and free assembly rights without fear that a cop is lurking in their midst.
who was responsible.pdf (141 k)