Articles

Leadership has many definitions and characteristics. In our profession, being a leader doesn’t always mean being promoted. Leadership can be learned; however, someone who has leadership ingrained in their DNA tends to stand out.

Being promoted to a position of management does not always mean the individual is a leader. Throughout my career, I have been fortunate enough to have worked with and around some folks who were outstanding leaders, from fellow squadmates all the way up through the command structure. I have also encountered many who are better described as “managers.”

One aspect of leadership is having the courage to make decisions devoid of emotion that are for the greater good, even if it means facing criticism for the decision.

Take, for example, our Critical Incident Review (formerly known as Use of Force) and Discipline Review boards. The Critical Incident Review Board consists of one assistant chief, one commander, one employee peer and three citizens of Phoenix. In comparison, the Discipline Review Board consists of one assistant chief, two commanders, two employee peers and two citizens of Phoenix. In addition to the board members, subject-matter experts from the Academy, along with a Department legal advisor, are present to answer any questions the board members may have.

Prior to the board convening, each member is given sufficient time to review the entire investigation. At the board meeting, the PSB investigator presents an overview of the case via PowerPoint. Following the presentation, the board members can ask questions to ensure they understand the information completely. When that portion has concluded, the officer(s) who are the subject of the investigation or their PLEA representative are able to make their own presentation to provide additional information for the board’s consideration. The board can ask questions of the officer or their representative at the conclusion of their presentation.

Once this portion is completed, everyone but the board members leaves the room so that the board can deliberate and have discussions among themselves. When the board has completed their deliberations, the officer(s) return, and the board chair conveys the board’s recommendation to the police chief. In the case of a critical incident review, it will be a recommendation of in policy or out of policy. In instances of discipline review, it will be a recommendation of length of suspension or termination.

Historically, the police chief has rarely deviated from the recommendations of the boards. I believe the reason for that is that the boards have been presented with an extensive, in-depth presentation and have been able to understand the circumstances surrounding each incident at a granular level.

Currently, we find ourselves in an environment where the chief is deviating from the recommendations quite regularly. There are examples of critical incidents deemed “in policy” by the review board being overturned for no other reason than “how it looks.” We have several examples of discipline recommendations being considered too lenient, even though they fall within the appropriate range for the class of violation.

In addition, some officers have been tasked with a decision to accept huge suspensions or be fired and fight for their jobs back based simply on how an incident looks or was perceived by some vocal members of the public, even though the “violation” falls within the Class I and Class II categories.

This leads me to question the necessity of these boards and even the discipline policy. Are these boards simply utilized to give the perception of community involvement in determining whether or not a use of force is in policy or to determine appropriate discipline? What is the point of wasting everyone’s time if the chief is ultimately going to disregard the boards’ recommendations? What is the point of having an addendum that prescribes where violations of policy fall and the range of discipline that should be administered if it isn’t going to be adhered to?

I doubt the Chief has the desire or the time to take such a deep, granular dive into every incident, so I suppose he relies on his emotion and how it made him feel, along with public opinion, to determine what he believes is an appropriate punishment.

These are not characteristics of a leader. In fact, these are characteristics of a manager at best. It certainly does not instill trust and loyalty in the men and women who day in and day out do their best to honorably serve the community.

As human beings, we are subjected to involuntary human emotions and reactions during times of stressful, life-threatening situations. Those human emotions cannot be avoided. Mistakes will inevitably be made; however, consideration of those human reactions cannot be minimized. In some instances, punishment will need to be handed down. When the punishment is fair and just, it will be supported. When it is draconian and excessive, it will be criticized and challenged.

The recommendations provided by the individuals who volunteer their time and energy for the Critical Incident Review and Disciplinary Review boards should be given greater weight than what seems to be occurring. Deviations, if made, should be rare, defendable and based on facts. Discipline should be used to change behavior, not punish families. Discipline should be fair, just and based on the totality of the facts and circumstances, not the emotions and feelings of the person in charge who has the luxury of time to evaluate decisions made in a split second or the public scrutiny of those who detest law and order and police officers in general.

We need courageous leaders who are not afraid to support their troops, not managers looking to avoid personal scrutiny to maintain their position.

Take care of yourselves and take care of each other. If you have questions or comments, I can be reached at the PLEA office or at dkriplean@azplea.com.

We often get asked the question, “What exactly does PLEA do for us?” Another question often asked is “I never get in trouble, so why do I need PLEA?” First, if you never get into any trouble or have any issues with the Department, good for you! I hope you can continue this streak. Many of your brothers and sisters on the Department aren’t so fortunate. I would like to point out that even if you don’t get into any issues with the Department, you are still benefiting from all that PLEA does for our membership behind the scenes.

This year alone, PLEA has attended over 415 meetings for the membership. We are making it clear in these meetings what our members’ needs are. The saying holds true: “If you don’t have a seat at the table, you’re probably on the menu.” These meetings are with various areas of the City that include:

• City labor management 
• Police labor management
• Various citywide workgroups
• City manager meetings
• City Council meetings
• Health care task force meetings
• DCP/PEHP board meetings
• PSPRS local board meetings
• DOJ meetings
• City of Phoenix Coalition of
  Unions meetings
• Department staffing meetings
• Assistant chief meetings
• Human Resources meetings
• EOD
• City budget meetings
• Clemency Board
• Civil Service Board
• Uniform Committee
• FTO Committee
• Overtime Committee
• Officer Communications Committee

Some of the issues covered in these meetings are officer rights, pay, leave benefits, light duty issues, health care and retirement issues. Our meetings with the Fourth Floor cover topics related to discipline issues, transfer issues, supervisor issues and staffing issues.

This year has been exceptionally busy, as we also dealt with the Department of Justice investigation and the possibility of a consent decree. Voicing our opinions and concerns regarding the DOJ has been critical, and we have facilitated many meetings with City elected officials, the City manager’s office and many community groups. In addition, we also hold our membership and Board meetings monthly; meet with our public relations firm, Camelback Strategies; and attend meetings with community leaders. All these meetings have one goal in common: to benefit the membership. PLEA is constantly advocating for its members, which means we are always fighting for you in all aspects of your employment with the City of Phoenix.

Unfortunately, sometimes you need PLEA when discipline matters occur. This is one item near and dear to me, and I am confident in saying it is an area that PLEA excels in. It is paramount that our representatives have current and relevant training regarding Garrity, Weingarten, Brady and discipline investigations. This year, PLEA representatives have taken over 450 hours of advanced training to ensure we are providing the best representation for our members. We have assisted members in over 200 discipline investigations this year alone, and have attended the following discipline meetings:

• IRP (Investigative Review Process): 21
• Use of Force, Response to Resistance boards: 17
• Grievance meetings: 2
• Loudermill hearings: 3
• Callout to officer-involved shootings: 24
• DRB (Discipline Review Board): 7

Our reps have been successful in mitigating discipline for our members by supporting and walking officers through the discipline process. Because of PLEA’s vigorous and robust representation, many cases end in a better outcome than expected by our members. We have also saved several officers’ careers through the relationships we have built with the executive staff and City management. When we don’t get the desired decision we seek, we have fought in civil service and AZPOST hearings with the assistance of our outstanding legal team.

I would be remiss if I did not mention the hundreds of hours our Board members and reps have spent on the phone with officers, assisting in answering questions and concerns. I hope that after reviewing all that PLEA does behind the scenes, you are confident that we are a benefit to you and your career as a Phoenix police officer. I encourage members to call the office if you have any questions or concerns we can address.

By Jerry

Have you ever decided to stop drinking for a week or so, but only lasted for a couple of days?

Do you wish people would mind their own business about your drinking and stop telling you what to do?

Have you ever switched from one kind of drink to another in the hope that this would keep you from getting drunk?

Do you envy people who drink without getting in trouble?

Have you had problems connected with drinking during the past year?

Has your drinking caused trouble at home?

Do you ever try to get extra drinks at a party because you do not get enough?

Do you tell yourself you can stop drinking any time you want to, even though you keep getting drunk when you don’t mean to?

Have you missed days of work because of drinking?

Do you have blackouts (not remembering what happened after drinking)?

Have you ever felt that your life would be better if you did not drink?

The above questions are from the pamphlet “Is A.A. for You?” published by Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., New York, N.Y.

The following are some additional questions to ask yourself regarding alcohol.

• Do you isolate when you drink?
• Do you defend your drinking?
• Does your life center around drinking?
• Are you ashamed of your drinking?
• Do you try to conceal or minimize how much you drink?
• Do you feel as if you have to drink so as not to get sick?

Did you answer “yes” four or more times? If so, you are probably in trouble with alcohol. We have a group of law enforcement officers, both currently employed and retired, who meet regularly to discuss our alcohol problems. We do not list the location, time or day of our meeting. It is by personal invitation only. Our meeting is confidential and anonymous. We will be glad to show you how we ourselves have stopped drinking. Just call us:  Jerry (602) 904-1088, Dan (602) 413-4558 or Mark (623) 377-3342.

About the Author

Jerry spent 35 years in law enforcement before retiring on January 31, 2008. His assignments included patrol, the information desk, Community Relations Bureau and detectives. He was promoted to sergeant on July 7, 1997. Jerry turned his life and career around when he quit drinking in 1983 after 10 years on the Department. He has since gone more than 40 years without a drink. For those who want to get sober, Jerry has this message to share: “Life is a lot better sober. You don’t have to keep looking behind you to see who’s chasing you.”

By John Maxwell

On December 7, PLEA Charities hosted the 13th annual Shop With a Cop along with the Arizona Probation Officers Association (AZPOA) at Kohl’s in north Phoenix. This event was our most successful to date, thanks to a grant from the West Valley Mavericks Foundation and an extremely generous donation from QuikTrip. With these monetary donations, we were able to support a record 195 children ranging from 7 to 12 years old, giving them an experience that they will never forget.

Officers who participated in this event were each assigned a child, whom they picked up and transported to Kohl’s in a fully marked police vehicle. Officers, children and numerous volunteers checked in at registration and immediately went to a warm, heated tent for breakfast sandwiches donated by Chick-fil-A, doughnuts, water, hot chocolate and coffee donated by Graveyard Shift Coffee. The officers and children then completed small Christmas-themed crafts that they could take home to their families.

There were many static displays on site for the children to see, including the Special Assignments Unit armed vehicle, four unmarked and marked police vehicles, the Phoenix Police ice cream van, two semi-tractors from Duncan and Sons Lines trucking, a 30-foot-tall Chick-fil-A cow and a full-sized Chick-fil-A hot air balloon that lifted off from the parking lot just before Blue Santa’s arrival.

Everyone then lined up in front of the Kohl’s store, anxiously waiting for the arrival of Blue Santa, who was riding to the store in the Phoenix Police Department helicopter. A Phoenix Police K-9 demonstration was conducted by two of our handlers, who showcased the dog’s ability to perform an apprehension of a suspect. The helicopter gradually came into view and circled the parking lot, playing sleigh bells through the PA system, before eventually touching down. Blue Santa and an elf emerged from the helicopter, waving and saying, “Merry Christmas, everyone.” Blue Santa greeted the children and quickly went inside the store to take his seat for pictures and to listen to what the children wanted for Christmas.

The Phoenix Police helicopter powered down and remained in the parking lot, allowing us to take a large group photo with it directly in front of the Kohl’s store. Afterward, everyone made their way into the store to start shopping. Kohl’s had 20 volunteers who donated their time to assist with this event and help the children and officers with the shopping experience.

Each child was provided with a $175 gift card to spend in store, and in some cases, our officers used their own money to cover overages at the register. While everyone was inside the store shopping, Blue Santa sat in his chair, and a professional photographer took pictures of him and the children to commemorate the event. Those photos were given to the children’s families.

On the side of the store, there were two large tents adorned with colored Christmas lights, each with tables and chairs to signify the gift-wrapping station. All the volunteers assisted the children with wrapping their gifts. Blue Santa even peeked out the side door and said, “It looks like Santa’s workshop out there.”

The event concluded, and Blue Santa left the store because he is very busy this time of year. The children were given rides back home by their officers, who loaded gifts in the back of their vehicles.

This is the largest Shop With a Cop event that PLEA Charities has ever hosted, and it stands as the single largest Shop With a Cop event in the state of Arizona!

I want to thank all of the Phoenix police officers and probation officers who make this event possible each year. This event embodies the true meaning of the Christmas spirit, and the relationships made with the children will never be forgotten. I also extend my sincere gratitude to the sponsors and donors who believe in the mission of PLEA Charities and support law enforcement. 

Last but not least, a big thank-you to Officer Jessica Tatum, whose assistance and meticulous planning were instrumental in putting all of this together. We could not have made this happen without you.

By Cassidy L. Bacon
Attorney at Law, Napier, Baillie,
Wilson, Bacon & Tallone, P.C.

As police officers and members in the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS), you have options if you are unable to perform your duties as a police officer because of illness or injury. This article will provide a brief overview of those options.

There are several types of medical/disability retirements. Each one has different requirements and benefits. If you are injured on duty, there are two main types of medical retirements for which you may qualify — an accidental disability retirement and a catastrophic disability retirement.

The most common we see is an accidental disability retirement. You may qualify for an accidental disability retirement if you have a physical or mental condition that totally and permanently prevents you from performing a reasonable range of your duties as a police officer. Calculating the amount of your accidental disability retirement benefits depends on your PSPRS membership tier but will not be less than 50% of your average monthly benefit compensation. Most, if not all, of the benefit amount is non-taxable.

Catastrophic disability retirements are reserved for those with physical injuries that totally and permanently prevent the employee from engaging in any gainful employment. Catastrophic disability benefits are calculated a bit differently. For the first five years, the employee would receive 90% of their average monthly benefit compensation tax-free. After that time, if the employee still qualifies for this type of retirement, their benefits are reduced to 62.5%, depending on years of service.

If, on the other hand, your illness or injury was incurred off duty, you may qualify for an ordinary disability retirement. This type of retirement requires either a physical condition that totally and permanently prevents you from performing a reasonable range of duties within the Department or a mental condition that totally and permanently prevents you from engaging in any gainful employment. Unlike medical retirements precipitated by an on-duty injury, ordinary disability benefits are taxable.

To obtain medical retirement benefits, you must first contact the City retirement office for an application. Once completed, you must file the application with the local board. This needs to occur no later than one year after ending your employment because of the disability. Once filed, the local board will then gather any relevant records from City Safety and schedule you for an initial appearance. At the initial appearance, your application will be reviewed. If the board determines that, on its face, your application meets the requisite standard, they will approve sending you for an independent medical examination, or IME. The IME will conduct a review of your records and an examination of you before making a determination as to whether you meet the standard for a medical retirement. The local board is bound by the findings of the IME in deciding whether to approve your application.

This article is intended to provide a brief overview of medical retirement benefits under PSPRS and should not be construed as legal advice. There are many nuances to the medical retirement statutes, so if you have questions or are considering a medical retirement, please reach out to discuss your specific situation. I can be reached at (602) 248-9107 or clbacon@napierlawfirm.com.

It has been over two years since the Department of Justice (DOJ) began its “pattern and practice” investigation into the Phoenix Police Department. Chief Sullivan provided an update a couple months ago and said that it has been a collaborative effort and that the seven meetings they have had with DOJ officials have been productive. He said “they,” the Department, have provided over 80,000 documents and more than 20,000 body-worn camera videos. He stated that “transparency is key to maintaining trust with the community” and that he was “looking forward to any next steps with the DOJ and welcomes future collaboration in this process.”

According to Webster’s Dictionary, the definition of collaboration is “to work jointly with others or together, especially in an intellectual endeavor.” In my many discussions with those involved with providing information to the DOJ investigators, collaboration is not what has been occurring. The Phoenix Police Department has handed over everything the DOJ has requested. They have gone so far as to provide restricted criminal justice information to the DOJ. Were those who received and worked with the restricted data CJIS compliant? As officers, we are required to successfully pass a terminal operator certification test every two years in order to access the same information. It seems like that kind of disclosure to unauthorized individuals could jeopardize our access to NCIC and ACIC. 

Unfortunately, that is not their game. They like the “Gotcha, and now we are going to publicly embarrass you” game. If you look at the other cities that have been hit with consent decrees, you find a common theme. They will meet with the mayor, police chief and possibly a city manager and pressure them into signing an agreement in principle. 

I have heard they like to #7100 show up at 4:45 on a Friday afternoon, letting them know that there is a press conference set for Monday morning and that it would be in their best interest to sign the agreement in principle so they can see the findings report to prepare for the Monday press conference. 

By signing the agreement in principle, the signer agrees to engage in negotiations for a consent decree. The interesting thing about these “agreements in principle” is that they want signatures on them before they release the “findings report” to the city in question. It’s kind of like being told you have committed a crime, but before they tell you what crime or what the sentence is going to be, you must plead guilty. Talk about a bad decision.  

The DOJ has a 30-year record of consent decrees. Not one can be touted as a success. Sure, some cities are forced to obtain equipment for their police departments, but, as a whole, they are unsuccessful. Consent decrees are successful in spiking violent crime and police department budgets and enriching the individuals chosen to serve as oversight monitors. For example, Albuquerque has realized an 80.27% rise in violent crime, Baltimore 7.86%, New Orleans 97.45%, Seattle 52.59% and Chicago 10.24%. Their budgets have had to increase anywhere from 23.67% (Chicago) to 82.72% (New Orleans). The others are in between.

Another rarely spoken about result of consent decrees is reduced police department staffing. Staffing numbers have decreased in every city listed above, all of which are currently subject to a consent decree. Albuquerque is down 10.51%, Baltimore 14.12%, New Orleans 35.81%, Seattle 15.50% and Chicago 2.04%. Considering there is a nationwide staffing crisis, losing more on top of the hundreds of vacancies doesn’t lend to quality customer service to the communities.

Here in Phoenix, we are approximately 600 short of the max staffing of 3,125. In a recent survey, PLEA asked members how likely they would be to retire or resign if a consent decree was implemented in Phoenix. 12.57% responded that they would definitely retire or resign, while another 30.26% said they would strongly consider retiring or resigning. 42.87% is a concerning number! 

In the same survey, we asked what the members felt would happen to crime if a consent decree was implemented. 93.73% said crime would rise either somewhat or substantially. That is in line with what we have seen across the country.

OV work also drops off or becomes nonexistent when consent decrees are in place. Officers are buried under paperwork for everyone they contact, not to mention if they must use force to affect an arrest, there will be several layers of investigation. It is easier for officers to sit and wait to respond to calls for service and limit their exposure to becoming potentially the next viral headline. Officers’ families rely on the benefits that come with being City of Phoenix employees. Therefore, career preservation becomes top priority. 

Police officers are not afraid of oversight. Our use-of-force boards and discipline review boards have just as many community members on the board as sworn members. Consent decrees have nothing to do with oversight, and they never have. Consent decrees are about police control, and in reality, it is the federal government, a federal court and a for-profit monitor who are always a DOJ insider, stealing control of local police departments away from the communities they serve and rendering them wholly ineffective. In addition, the monitors will be enriched to the tune of tens of millions of dollars per year and only required to provide four reports per year. Consent decrees are nothing more than a scam. 

Ask yourself: What incentive does a for-profit monitor have to find an agency in compliance when that means their gravy train ends? They are the only ones who can determine whether full compliance is obtained. Talk about stacking the deck!

The City of Phoenix finds itself in a unique position compared to other cities. Our council/manager form of government does not allow the mayor to sign an agreement in principle like other jurisdictions. It takes a majority vote of the council to enter into any agreement or to give consent to DOJ oversight. Interestingly, when Alamance County, North Carolina, refused to consent and the DOJ filed suit, all the exhibits the DOJ submitted were thrown out by the court as unreliable.     

The bottom line is this: If the Phoenix City Council decides to consent to a decree of federal oversight, this city will become another statistic in a long list of failed federal government experiments. It is time for this to end for everyone, and I hope and pray that this mayor and council have the courage and determination to stand up to this sham.

As always, if you have questions or comments, I can be reached at the PLEA office or by email at dkriplean@azplea.com.