Stating that Cleveland “has a ways to go” in reforming policing, the federal judge who oversees the consent decree rejected the city’s request to end it.
U.S. District Court Judge Solomon Oliver’s ruling Friday was in response to a joint request in February from the city and the U.S. Department of Justice, which argued that the city and police department had reached “substantial compliance” with the goals of the 2015 agreement.
The consent decree mandates broad reforms to how police use force and interact with residents. Oliver said at the time that he was surprised by the request. In his order, he noted the request was “surely premature.”
Mayor Justin Bibb expressed disappointment in the decision but vowed to keep working.
“Cleveland has made real progress under the consent decree, and that progress belongs to our residents, officers, and community partners,” Bibb said in a statement. “While we are disappointed by today’s decision, our commitment to constitutional policing, accountability, and building trust has not changed.”
In March, the Monitoring Team, the independent body that evaluates Cleveland’s progress, reported that the city “appears closer” to fully complying with the terms of the consent decree, but it flagged some areas in which more work is needed. Those included supervision, bias-free policing and community and problem-oriented policing.
Mayor Justin M. Bibb
“Cleveland has made real progress under the consent decree, and that progress belongs to our residents, officers, and community partners. While we are disappointed by today’s decision, our commitment to constitutional policing, accountability, and building trust has not changed.”
The Cleveland Community Police Commission, the final authority on policy and discipline, opposed ending the consent decree. Oliver denied the commission’s request to file a brief. In his order Friday, he wrote that he “cannot ignore the fact that the CPC felt compelled to make such a filing.” He also noted “the City’s history denying the CPC access to documents” that it needs to review discipline decisions made by the chief of police or the director of the Department of Public Safety.
“The commission is pleased with the decision,” co-chair John Adams told Signal Cleveland. “We hope that this is an opportunity to work more collaboratively with the city, in particular as it pertains to accessing records … in a timely fashion.”
The judge noted that the city’s recent hiring of the public safety consulting firm Jensen Hughes to assess how police oversight bodies work together shows that “more work is needed to implement and sustain these community police oversight bodies.”
Oliver scheduled another hearing for June 4 and said he expects updates on several developments, including Jensen Hughes, community surveys and “the City’s current relationship with the CPC in light of the Commission’s public disagreement.”
