August 19, 2004

Police Union Retracts Endorsement Of Francesconi

Are Others To Follow?

First, some quick background and context, which originally apppeared in an update to our previous item. Then we're going back to trying to finish up last Friday's campaign event before we have to go to a new one tomorrow morning.

KGW is reporting this afternoon that the Portland Police Association indeed has withdrawn its endorsement of Francesconi because of his negative radio ads.

Now, given our candidate biases, we obviously find this important news. But we'd be remiss if we didn't point out that it's not like we haven't had our own issues with the police union, given their opposition to sensible reform measures such as writing reports after drawing a weapon. Nonetheless, this is a critical moment from a political campaign standpoint.

Meanwhile, today's Oregonian report on the ad controversies indicates that former City Commissioner Mike Lindberg, who endorsed Francesconi during the primary also appears to be "assessing his role for the November general election."

What follows is the complete text of the Portland Police Association's statement regarding its decision to take back its endorsement.

August 19, 2004

The Portland Police Association's Executive Board unanimously voted today to rescind its endorsement of Jim Francesconi in the Portland mayoral race. It is the first time in the PPA's history that the PPA has retracted an endorsement.

The PPA has had concerns for several months about Commissioner Francesconi. Those concerns became acute with the latest series of "attack ads" launched by Commissioner Francesconi against Tom Potter. Because of its role in representing Portland’s rank and file police officers, the PPA knows that both of the attack ads that have aired in the last two weeks have been seriously misleading.

The first ad, which deals with a police officer involved in the non-fatal shooting of a suspect, is misleading or false in at least the following respects:

* It implies that Tom Potter was the chief of the Portland Police Bureau at the time of the shooting. In fact, Charles Moose was the police chief.

* It implies that Tom Potter had something to do with restoring the officer to his job after the shooting. In fact, it was an independent arbitrator who ruled that the officer had been wrongly fired.

* It refers to the officer as a "bad cop." In fact, the arbitrator who reinstated the officer – an arbitrator on the Board of Directors of the Oregon ACLU at the time – found that the officer had done nothing wrong whatsoever in shooting at the suspect.

* It fails to mention the fact that (1) the suspect, with a criminal record, had just used a substantial amount of cocaine; (2) the officers were called to the scene by a bus driver, who had just been terrorized by the suspect; (3) the suspect assaulted the officers when they approached him in the bus; and (4) at the time the officer started shooting, the suspect was pointing a .45 caliber handgun at the officer.

* It fails to disclose that Commissioner Francesconi had intimate knowledge of these facts because he acted as the suspect's private attorney. Commissioner Francesconi sued the City after the incident, recovering over $100,000 when the City settled shortly after the lawsuit was filed.

* It fails to indicate that, in his first race for City Council after suing the City, Commissioner Francesconi approached the PPA seeking its endorsement. In the endorsement process, Commissioner Francesconi downplayed his role in representing the suspect, indicating he was only doing his job, and expressed surprise that the City would offer him so much money for the case.

The second ad is troubling for a different reason. This ad, currently running in the Portland media, claims that Tom Potter tolerated sexual harassment in the workplace when he was police chief. Not only is this ad false – Tom Potter was a vigorous advocate of respect and dignity in the police workplace, both among employees and between employees and the public – but it overlooks something that Commissioner Francesconi, as a City Council member, should know all too well.

The incident to which the ad refers involves Tom Potter's decision to reverse the demotion of a police sergeant who engaged in sexual harassment. The ad fails to indicate the following:

* One of the reasons Chief Potter reversed the demotion because he received something extremely valuable in the bargain – a jointly written resolution signed by the City and the PPA opposing sexual, racial, and religious harassment, and promising serious discipline for any employee who violated the City’s policies.

* That a joint employer-union resolution of this sort is not only rare, but perhaps is the most powerful measure to prevent employee misconduct.

* That, in the 10 years after the resolution, and long after Tom Potter retired as chief, the PPA filed no challenges to any discipline imposed by the City for sexual harassment. Despite the fact that the increased integration into the law enforcement workplace spawned a raft of sexual harassment lawsuits in other police agencies around the country, the fact is that the joint PPA-City resolution worked precisely as Chief Potter and the PPA intended, and minimized greatly the incidents of reported inappropriate behavior.

* That, in addition to the joint PPA-City resolution, the sergeant still served a month-long suspension, the equivalent of a fine of almost $5,000. The sergeant learned his lesson from the incident, and returned to work after the suspension to complete his career without receiving any additional discipline.

The PPA cannot support any political candidate who airs advertisements that are false or misleading. The PPA deeply regrets the way Commissioner Francesconi has decided to conduct his campaign. Portland needs a vigorous debate on the issues as to who should be our next mayor. It does not need attack ads, much less ones that attack not only a candidate, but the City's entire police force. Ads that are intentionally or recklessly misleading have no place in Portland.

While the statement is fairly deferential and supportive when it comes to Potter, it reamins to be seen if the Association's retraction of its endorsement of Francesconi will translate into an endorsement of Potter, or if it will simply remain neutral in the race from this point forward.

Posted at 03:04 PM | PermalinkComments (7) | TrackBacks (4)
More In 2004 Mayoral Campaign, Metro-Area Politics

« Previous Next »