Smackdown for Streicher & Co.

The devolution of the vaunted collaborative agreement on police reform -- from rallying point for civic progress to cudgel over the city's head -- would be comical if it weren't so serious. Inst

Mar 30, 2005 at 2:06 pm
David Sorcher


Jorge Delao marched Downtown on Good Friday in the Way of the Cross/Way of Justice procession.



The devolution of the vaunted collaborative agreement on police reform — from rallying point for civic progress to cudgel over the city's head — would be comical if it weren't so serious. Instead, let's just agree that it's soooo Cincinnati.

Since 2002, Mayor Charlie Luken and Vice Mayor Alicia Reece have told people across the country that we're a whole new city with dramatic improvements in police-community relations thanks to the groundbreaking collaborative agreement. That was their best argument in countering the civil rights boycott of Cincinnati.

Having apparently exhausted the bragging rights yielded by the reform agreement, last year Luken turned his back on it, proposing the city try to end the deal. Police Chief Tom Streicher therefore had every reason to sneer at the reforms called for in the agreement. When a monitor team working for the federal court showed up at police headquarters at the end of the year, Streicher and Assistant Chief Richard Janke insulted and intimidated them before "inviting" them to leave.

Now Luken, Streicher and Janke no longer have a collaborative agreement to kick around — instead they'll labor under a court order mandating reform of the police department. In a restrained tone, Dlott's March 28 ruling makes plain that she won't tolerate any more intransigence. Further violations could lead to fines or jail time for city officials.

"Needless to say, should any such violations occur, the court will take all appropriate actions necessary to enforce the collaborate agreement," Dlott wrote.

The ruling made short shrift of assertions by Luken and City Manager Valerie Lemmie that the confrontation at police headquarters in December 2004 was merely an expression of police frustration with the reform initiative or a kind of miscommunication.

"The improper conduct of top police officials toward these court officers is a serious problem deserving careful attention," Dlott wrote. "Differences of opinion and miscommunications are very different from the obstructive behavior described here."

That virtually echoes City Councilman Christopher Smitherman's call for Streicher and Janke to be formally disciplined for their behavior. In a Feb. 18 letter to Lemmie, he expressed concern that the city wasn't taking the incident seriously enough.

"The lack of management of the police department is an underlying factor that maintains the loose atmosphere in which the police chief and his lieutenant colonels regularly exercise such disturbing decisions," Smitherman's letter said. "The absence of prompt, firm regulation of unacceptable autonomous behavior is undermining the credibility of the entire Cincinnati Police Department."

Smitherman repeated his concern after learning of Dlott's ruling this week.

"Streicher and Janke put us here," he said. "Focus on those two people and deal with their behavior. This shows the culture of our police department, their unwillingness to change. They're holding onto the doorway of 1950, 1960 policing."

The same morning Dlott released her ruling, someone threw a brick through the window of Smitherman's campaign headquarters in Avondale. Smitherman, who has hinted at a run for the mayor's seat, says he'll announce his decision April 7.

State Sen. Mark Mallory (D-West End), who is already running for mayor, issued a statement lamenting the fact that the court order was necessary.

"It is an absolute shame that it has come to this," he said. "Certainly, everyone should realize that the collaborative agreement is an opportunity to reform the relationship between the police and the community. I am amazed that the situation was allowed to deteriorate to the point that a court order was necessary."

DeWine and Heimlich Should Be Committed
A year ago, shortly after winning re-election to city council, Pat DeWine decided he'd rather be a Hamilton County Commissioner.

This is what County Commissioner Phil Heimlich said about that idea: "I support Pat DeWine in order to bring a conservative majority to the commission that is committed to getting taxes and spending under control."

But "committed" is such a relative term when it comes to politics. Now, less than three months after becoming a county commissioner, DeWine has decided he'd rather be a member of Congress. He's running for the seat soon to be vacated by U.S. Rep. Rob Portman (R-Terrace Park).

Meanwhile, Heimlich has decided he'd rather be lieutenant governor of Ohio, a seat that's up for election next year. This is what DeWine had to say of his colleague Heimlich just a few weeks ago: "Our challenge over the next few years is to transform our county into one of the best run county governments in the country."

In politics, "next few years" is also a relative term.

If the two "family values" Republicans have difficulty understanding the idea of commitment, they had a chance to see it firsthand March 25 on Good Friday, the occasion of the annual Way of the Cross/Way of Justice march through downtown Cincinnati. Participants not only remembered the crucifixion of Jesus but visited contemporary reminders of the struggle for justice and peace in Cincinnati such as the Federal Building and the Hamilton County Justice Center.



Porkopolis TIP LINES: 513-665-4700 (ext. 138)