The top responsibility for local government is public safety. San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman is set to retire in March, and the city has already begun the process of choosing her successor. The city has spent several weeks gathering public input on priorities for our next chief, and will soon embark on a publicly funded, nationwide search to identify the best candidates for the job.
Like Zimmerman, our next chief will be the leader of local law enforcement. This individual will be tasked with addressing some of SDPD’s biggest challenges, such as shaping the department’s culture during a time when community-police relations need improvement in some neighborhoods, training and deploying officers to serve and protect our diverse city and developing a strategy to recruit and retain quality police officers.
With Zimmerman’s retirement, Mayor Kevin Faulconer is faced with a critical opportunity to build and strengthen the trust between the community and law enforcement for years to come, and it’s critical we get it right.
This week, the city concluded six community forums across San Diego to elicit comments and feedback from the community as to what qualities and characteristics they hoped to see in the next police chief. In a recent KPBS interview, forum facilitator Danell Scarborough said that a common theme among the forums was transparency in both the selection process and leadership style of the next chief.
But as far as we know, the mayor’s current plan still includes a secret hiring panel, which will not disclose its members to the public until the process is over. That would mean that the only opportunity for the public to participate in this process was at one of six community forums or by completing an online survey that closes Oct. 13.
We cannot leave San Diegans in the dark as to the make-up of the panel, which will inform the mayor’s decision on our next police chief. This falls short of an open and transparent process needed to build trust among our communities. Listening to the community’s feedback, the mayor must work with the City Council to establish a hiring process that is more open to the public and includes diverse community stakeholders.
We Stand Up for You. Will You Stand Up for Us?
Hey, folks, last I looked you people on the city council had the authority to reject the mayor’s choice. Why can’t we leave it there?
“….transparency in both the selection process and leadership style…”. Just what does that mean? The transcript of the summary of the results of the six “community forums” seems to stress openness and “cultural humility”, which I translate as racial awareness. “Openness” is simply a buzzword.
There is one problem with the idea of “openness” if it includes identification of candidates to the public: The best candidates may be currently employed in similar positions in other jurisdictions. Will any be interested if their identity is revealed to the public beforehand?
As for this “secret panel” claim, COO Chadwick’s comments seem exactly right: To prevent lobbying of panel members and allegations the panel is biased, plus to protect candidate privacy. The people running the city are accountable to the voters at the polls. We should trust that they have picked appropriate people to serve.
The idea of “community members” being part off the panel is great. What do you propose, a lottery to choose them, or perhaps having spokespeople for every significant minority group in the community serve. Hey, maybe we could get Al Sharpton?