Editorial: Police Guild steps farther away from public trust

Why would the Spokane Police Guild follow a course of action that deepens distrust between its officers and the public?

Apparently, the answer is: Because it can.

An arbitrator ruled that the city must rescind its popular decision to hand the police ombudsman greater independence to conduct his own investigations, and to make his findings public, without the imprimatur of those who would be investigated.

The wrangling centered on whether the city could adopt this change without bargaining with the union, as it does with pay, benefits and workplace issues. The city’s position was that it was within the bounds of state labor law, because disciplinary decisions would remain with the Police Department. The union’s position, which was supported by arbitrator Michael H. Beck, was that increased oversight and transparency could compel the department to mete out punishment, and thus becomes a workplace change that must be bargained.

The public is very much in favor of greater oversight because of diminishing confidence in the department to police itself. The Otto Zehm case and others have increased public suspicion of the police.

To regain trust, union leadership could’ve decided to let the strengthened law stand. As long as the department has nothing to hide, it shouldn’t fear having its work independently reviewed.

The City Council passed the change unanimously. The mayor signed it. The public wants it.

Instead, the union has erected another wall of indifference to public sentiment, because it can. Never mind that this widens the gulf between police officers and the public. Never mind that this growing distrust makes their jobs more difficult. Plus, as the mayor has said, bargaining with the guild over the ombudsman’s authority could hinder the city’s efforts to gain compensation concessions as it tries to balance the budget.

By blocking independent investigations and reports, the union is demonstrating that it doesn’t trust the ombudsman or the public. Guild President Ernie Wuthrich expressed concern that independent probes might taint the ombudsman’s views of Police Department findings.

With thinking like that, we might as well dump all auditing and oversight functions of government and adopt a “trust us” model.

Now that the arbitrator has reversed the ombudsman changes, the city must find another way to gain the kind of oversight the public demands. It can try to get the state law changed (a long shot), or it can enter into bargaining with the union, where the public is not invited.

In the meantime, the police force will absorb a baton strike to its reputation. By winning, it has suffered another setback.