Committee Report CR-2
The Civic Unity Committee held a public meeting on March 9, 2011 beginning at 6:44 PM in the Community Room of the Healy Public Safety Facility, 125 Sixth Street. The purpose of the meeting was to continue discussing with the Civic Unity Citizen Advisory Committee the recommendations of the Cambridge Review Committee Report: "
Present at the meeting were Councillor E. Denise Councillor Simmons, Chair of the Committee, Deputy Superintendent Steven DeMarco, Cambridge Police Department (CPD), Margaret Drury, City Clerk, Muna Kangsen, Aide to Councillor Simmons, Brian Corr, Executive Director, Cambridge Peace Commission, Advisory Committee, Estelle Disch, Advisory Committee, Attorney Sean Hope, Advisory Committee, Dr. Janie Ward, professor, Councillor Simmons College, residence 30 Parker Street, Advisory Committee, Sally Haslanger, MIT professor, residence, 395 Washington Street, Advisory Committee, Marc Levy, writer and editor,
Councillor Simmons convened the meeting and explained the purpose. Councillor Simmons expressed her thanks to Commissioner Haas and the CPD for hosting the meeting in the CPD Community Room. Councillor Simmons noted that during the meeting of February 9, committee members were asked to read
in order to have a conversation about the report's recommendations at today's meeting. Councillor Simmons then invited members present to comment on the recommendations, including what may have been left out.
Councillor Simmons noted that the while the CPD has been proactive in implementing some of the recommendations, the CPD has not been as effective in communicating what it has done and is currently doing with residents of Cambridge. She also reiterated her strong recommendation that the CPD designate someone already on staff to handle its communications with Cambridge residents. Councillor Simmons also emphasized the need for closer working relations between the CPD, the Harvard and MIT Police, the Transit Police and the MBTA and asked what efforts had been taken to foster collaboration between these disparate police forces.
Professor Haslanger noted that while some collaboration between CPD, Harvard and MIT Police would be helpful, each police force has a distinct mission. She cited MIT's concerns about protecting the first amendment rights of student and sensitivity over immigration, which the MIT community expects the MIT Police Force to take into account in their work. She would not want this perspective to be compromised. MIT faculty members are told by the MIT administration in certain circumstances it is important to call MIT police rather than city police. There are many international students for whom MIT faculty and staff have an
feeling. Deputy DeMarco stated that the process of increasing collaboration has begun. CPD has incorporated Harvard and MIT police departments into CPD in-service programs. This kind of collaboration provides an opportunity to address differences as well as commonalities.
Councillor Simmons also noted that the CPD should have a mission statement on its website. Deputy DeMarco said that the CPD does have a mission statement on its website and is currently involved in a department-wide process to revamp the mission statement. The mission statements of each unit of the CPD are being revamped and the CPD's mission statement will be based on the revamped unit mission statements.
With regard to what may have been left out from the report, Attorney Sean Hope noted that while the report contained a lot of information about the expectations of the CPD, it contained very little in the way of CPD's expectations of the community. Attorney Hope wondered if the community at large knew that they could be arrested in their own homes. Mr. Hope said that he thought the de-escalation portion of the report was very powerful. He would like to see more information on what police expectations are of citizens on a day-to-day basis.
Dr. Ward noted that the report presented answers to questions that it raised but she was not certain whether those questions were the ones the community at large needed to have answered. She said that the report may not have spoken/addressed the communities' most important questions. Dr. Ward wondered whether the incident would have garnered that much attention if it had happened to her and not a celebrity professor.
Marc Levy said that the report was awful because it was focused on the wrong issue. Mr. Levy observed that while the report mentioned de-escalation several times, the report dedicated only a page to the issue of disorderly conduct which was cited as the basis for Professor Gate's arrest. Mr. Levy also stated that Officer Crowley knew that there was no robbery in progress at Professor Gate's home when he was arrested and questioned whether it was necessary to de-escalate a situation that should never have occurred in the first place. He does not believe that Sergeant Crowley ever had any actual fear.
Attorney Sean Hope observed that although the report was commissioned after the Gates affair, he thought that the report was about police conduct in general, especially going forward, rather than the specifics of the Gates/Crowley incident. That has been done
. Mr. Hope said he was pleased to hear that the CPD was contemplating various de-escalation strategies. Mr. Hope also stated that it was a good step for the CPD to question its own legitimacy in the community from time-to-time and applauded the CPD's legitimacy training.
Dr. Ward observed that soon as a crisis with racial overtones occurs, people become very interested in talking about moving forward without a thorough examination of what happened until the next incident occurs. Dr. Ward further stated that she believes the same to be true of the Gates affair. Professor Haslanger noted that despite the Beer Summit, there is a still a gaping wound in the community as a result of the Gates affair which needs to be healed. With regards to race, Attorney Sean Hope noted that race cuts both ways and acknowledged that many people had a perspective that was in part informed by race and that is why it was important to examine the Gates affair in a broader context. Healing one incident does not heal all of them. Agreeing with Hope about the multiplicity of contexts in which to view the arrest of Professor Gates and the report which ensued, Dr. Ward stated that race and class were both important variables in the arrest and subsequent crisis.
Brian Corr agreed that even though the issues of race and class were both at play in the Gates affair, the community, in its conversations, focused mainly on race. Mr. Corr also stated that while in the US in general and in Cambridge in particular people are much more comfortable talking about race than socioeconomic class. This particular incident involved an African American of higher socioeconomic class than the white police officer, which added a further complexity to the intersection of race and class.
focused a great deal on legitimacy, de-escalation and recruitment, it did not touch on social class. In 1947, when the Civic Unity Committee was first established, part of the mission that was assigned to it was to address issues such as social class.
did not address social class and the Civic Unity Committee has not completed the mission that was first assigned in 1947. Councillor Simmons stated the conversation about race and class was an important conversation, but wondered how best to conduct it without the divisiveness that always seems to characterize these conversations. She added that despite the difficult nature of the conversation around race and class, Cambridge was well equipped to handle this conversation. She said that she is taking from this conversation that the Advisory Committee is recommending that such a conversation should be held.
Dr. Ward noted two different dynamics in the conversation about race and class. Dr. Ward averred that while the remedy for race revolves around equality, with regards to social class the remedy often gets murky. Dr. Ward stated that the Gates affair was about privilege and the inability to see one's class privilege because of their race. With regards to the impact of social class on the Gates affair, Attorney Hope stated that the conversations in the African American community regarding the Gates affair were focused on race and not class and wondered how to have a conversation about race and class that was outcome-driven. She also noted that establishing an historical record is one significant outcome that should not be overlooked.
At this juncture Professor Haslanger stated that it would be important to establish a structure that would help to facilitate this conversation well into the future. Councillor Simmons agreed with Professor Haslanger and stated that despite the best efforts there will be more incidents that highlight the issue of race and class. She queried whether the structure suggested by Sally would benefit from having a single individual lead the conversation. Ms. Disch agreed with Councillor Simmons and Professor Haslanger that issues of race and class warrant an ongoing conversation. Councillor Simmons agreed with Mr. Hope's point that the results must be outcome driven.
Alluding to school reform in Cambridge, Brian Corr stated that people generally tend to see how they are disadvantaged and, in so doing, become oblivious to the advantages they enjoy. Professor Haslanger noted that there were some town and gown issues that
did not cover. At this juncture, Dr. Ward inquired if members of the committee were deploying individual recommendations to what was otherwise a systemic problem. Dr. Ward stated that while dialogue is important in addressing issues of race and class, systemic action beyond the purview of those doing the talking is necessary. Alluding to the reference to school reform, Dr. Ward stated that the same issues that were raised during the merger of the Cambridgeport School are been raised about the Innovation Agenda and averred that then as now, a lot of important issues were not discussed.
did not address any of the key issues raised by the arrest of Professor Gates, Marc Levy inquired distinguished the right to free speech from disorderly conduct, stating that in the aftermath of Professor Gates' arrest many lawyers stated that Gates would not be found guilty of any crime except perhaps acting in a contemptuous manner towards a Police Officer. Levy noted that Professor Gates' record was never expunged. There must be a clear line between what is disorderly conduct and what is merely the noisy exercise of freedom of speech.
Brian Corr questioned what would happen if such a clear distinction were made. Attorney Hope then stated that he can envision a situation in which such a clear line would not be very helpful, noting that disorderly conduct arrests can be hard to prove. Deputy DeMarco stated that he did not think a bright line delineating freedom of speech from disorderly conduct was possible, and that evaluation of the difference requires one to place themselves in the shoes of the officer doing the arrest or responding to the call. Deputy DeMarco stated that the police can make an arrest when there is a warrant involved; consent is given or because of extraneous circumstances. Highlighting the extent to which the arresting officer's judgment is at play in a disorderly conduct arrest, Deputy DeMarco noted that case law stipulates that the a police officer can break down the door to an apartment to turn the music off and charge the violator with disorderly conduct.
Mr. Levy then inquired if the CPD had made any efforts to create some parameters for levying a disorderly conduct charge. Deputy DeMarco noted Police Officers do not like making disorderly conduct arrests, but have to do so anyway at times. Councillor Simmons than inquired if the term disorderly conduct was a catch-all term for various offenses. Deputy DeMarco stated that there are a few categories of cases such as domestic violence cases where arrests are mandatory and confirmed that the police maintain a lot of discretion in many other types of arrests. Clerk Drury then cited the extensive CPD report analyzing disorderly conduct arrests that was included in the report of the last Civic Unity Committee meeting. She stated that the report contained information about changes that the CPD has already made in the area of disorderly conduct arrests especially with regard to training and to requiring an increased level of detail in police reports involving disorderly conduct arrests.
the police, nor talk about temperament. Professor Haslanger agreed. She said that in light of the amount of literature on garbage collection residents receive, you would expect some literature about the rights of the community
the police. Attorney Hope agreed with the need for this kind of practical information and then stated that he thought the report failed to create a balance between constitutional issues and practical information.
Dr. Ward stated that in the aftermath of the Gates arrest, many people worried about what would happen to them in a similar situation if Professor Gates, given his stature, could be treated the way he was by the police and affirmed her believe in an inclusive conversation that addresses the perspective of the police and that of the community.
Councillor Simmons thanked all those present for their participation. She said that she would look at the possible meeting dates and contact committee members when a date has been established. The meeting was adjourned at 8:28 P.M.