We are moving into the final weeks of the police chief selection process and, in my view, we had better get this important decision right for a whole variety of reasons—public confidence in our police officers to be the fair, respectful and effective protectors we expect, the morale and stability of our police force and our desire to reduce crime in an era of shrinking resources. (Read my earlier posts on the selection of a new police chief.)
The last point above—reducing crime at a time of shrinking resources—shouldn't be overlooked when public attention is rightly focused on what is a regrettable and troubling incident.
Reducing crime—the most important goal of any police department, in my view—is crucially important to protect our neighborhoods and there are evolving theories about how to do it in a manner that upholds fairness and civil liberties.
Two of the most prominent scholars nationally advancing these new theories are David Kennedy at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York and Professor Mark Kleiman at UCLA.
Kleiman was in Seattle recently for a series of meetings with the City Council, police commanders, judges, regional elected officials, and a public forum at Town Hall. Watch the Town Hall event. Kleiman's views on reform of policing and the criminal justice system are summarized in his book, When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment. It's well worth the read.
Now, the process for selection of a police chief.
The Seattle City Charter—our City's constitution, if you will—defines the process for choosing a Chief of Police; Article VI, Section 2 and Section 3. The Charter instructs the Mayor to appoint the Chief from three finalists after each applicant completes an "examination." This examination, over the years, has been defined as the process recent Mayors have followed—receiving applications, citizens' committee screening, a written essay from each applicant, oral interviews by the citizen's committee, presentation of three finalists selected by the citizens' committee to the Mayor, presentation of the three finalists to the City Council in a public meeting which allows Council members to direct questions to the finalists. This whole process constitutes the "examination" required by the City Charter.
Once the Mayor makes his final decision and submits his appointment to the City Council for confirmation, our review process is guided by Council Resolution 30962, adopted in March 2007.