An editorial in The Monterey County Herald argues that laws restricting access to records about police misconduct do not permit scrutiny of police officials in administrative positions who should not be able to hide behind secrecy provisions. -DB

The Monterey County Herald
Editorial
August 14, 2009

Before it’s over, don’t be surprised if the apparent suspension of Seaside’s police chief, a deputy police chief and two police officers helps make the case for loosening California’s extreme restrictions on the public release of information about investigations into alleged law enforcement misconduct.

Already, the seeming inability of anyone in power in the Police Department or elsewhere at City Hall to comment on the mystery suggests it is time to put some common sense into the law, particularly as it applies to a police department’s top brass.

California’s tight personnel rules — tighter than in several other states — were largely meant to protect officers on the street from undue public scrutiny or unfair criticism that could make it harder for them to protect the public.

The thinking was that because they deal with such a wide cross section of people, often in extremely stressful circumstances, even some of the better performers in the police ranks could be subjected to unfounded complaints and criticisms that could prove to be career-killers if the information went into public circulation. If officers had to worry constantly about every scrap of information in their personnel files, they could become so cautious as to become ineffective in the field.

Unfortunately, the rules on the books have been applied so broadly, and not always correctly or appropriately, that many public officials believe they cannot comment on investigations involving the conduct of police officers under any circumstances.

The rules and regulations, and even the court rulings that have interpreted them, were meant primarily to protect the rank and file, the officers who come in regular contact with the public and who are most susceptible to trumped up allegations. The rules and regulations were never meant to shield senior police officials from public scrutiny — or to muzzle them when they or others have been falsely accused.

The result, as the current procedures involving Police Chief Stephen Cercone and the others may show, ultimately could be unfair to the officers and to the public. The public is left in the dark about what is going on at arguably the most important and powerful institution in the community. The officers, meanwhile, could be left unable to defend themselves from the rumors that naturally follow any sort of wholesale suspension. When public support for a police agency is eroded, public safety can be compromised.

As soon as possible, those who do know what’s going on in Seaside should take it upon themselves to research the various rules and regulations with an eye toward providing as much public information as possible.

Contrary to common belief, the law does not provide a blanket prohibition on releasing basic information about such inquiries. Generally, it enables but does not require public agencies to wrap themselves in secrecy, especially when it seems obvious that the public interest, and perhaps even the officers’ interests, would be better served by a responsible amount of disclosure.

Copyright 2009 Monterey County Heral