The Cleveland Community Police Commission (CPC) has made allegations against the Cleveland police regarding the handling of 40 cases of internal misconduct. Furthermore, they have disclosed the identities of the officers who lodged complaints.
Recently, tensions have escalated between the city of Cleveland and the CPC due to the release of confidential information related to internal police inquiries.
In a statement released on Tuesday, the CPC asserted that the Cleveland Division of Police neglected to properly investigate a minimum of 40 reported instances of internal misconduct.
As evidence, they attached a list of the open cases from 2019 to now, including discrimination, workplace violence and sexual harassment, including the names of the officers who filed the misconduct claims.
“It is against any practice I’ve ever known as an HR professional to release that type of information for ongoing investigations,” said Cleveland Director of Human Resources Matthew Cole.
Cole says the city was shocked to see the disclosure of information.
“Not only just such a breach of trust, but just, we were pretty flabbergasted at the complete disregard for the employees, primarily,” said Cole.
According to Cole, last month while fulfilling a records request, the city discovered that misconduct cases had not been investigated by the previous HR team.
Cole says they reported the problem to the inspector general and began to investigate the misconduct cases, and then released the information to the police commission in what Cole calls “good faith. The city is also required to turn over the information.
“[This situation] has continued to erode, if not completely break, the trust that exists between us and CPC,” Cole added.
Cole says the city has been in communication with the police union, who tells them officers are angry and upset, as many of these officers filed complaints believing their reports would be kept anonymous.
John Adams, co-chair of the Community Police Commission (CPC) says the CPC stands behind their decision to release the information.
“I know that people are uncomfortable, but this is what police oversight looks like,” said Adams.
Adams argues the only reason the city began taking action on these cases was because of records requests the commission filed — emphasizing their goal is accountability.
“We don’t want officers or civilians who make complaints, internal complaints, we don’t want them to have to wait six years,” said Adams.
When asked why they released complainant names, Adams said the CPC thought over the decision to make redactions for multiple days before deciding the public had the right to see these documents as they stand.
He believes the city should have redacted the documents before sharing them if they really waned to protect sensitive information.
“If the city and the police department have issues with our push to be more transparent with the public and to have more accountability, then we won’t see eye to eye on some things, and that’s okay,” said Adams.
On Wednesday, the CPC went before Cleveland City Council asking for more funding.
CPC wants an additional $350,000 to hire two full-time project coordinators and fund three new consultant projects.
Right now, the proposed city budget allots $2.2 million dollars for the CPC, the minimum amount required by the city charter.
Adams says the CPC needs more to “avoid the risk of prolonged federal oversight and loss of public trust.”
The city budget will be finalized by April 1.
