Despite opposition by police and a violation of the Open Meeting Law, supporters of establishing a civilian board to review charges of police misconduct in Providence expect their proposal to soon become law.

On May 16, the Providence City Council voted 11-4 to create a 20-member Providence External Review Authority (PERA) to investigate complaints against police and make non-binding recommendations to the police chief regarding discipline. Under the proposed ordinance, the mayor and city council would select PERA members, and no more than three could be former police officers. The vote was nullified, however, because the council failed to provide the required 48 hours of written notice before the meeting.

At a meeting on Saturday, May 25, the ordinance's prime sponsor, councilwoman Patricia Nolan predicted PERA will pass again at the council's June 6 meeting. Kyle Bennett, Mayor Vincent A. "Buddy" Cianci Jr.'s director of black affairs, said Cianci is "in agreement 110 percent that changes have to be made," although he's taken no position on PERA. Nolan, however, predicts that Cianci would sign the legislation if it again passes 11-4.

Meanwhile, Providence police chief Richard Sullivan opposes the ordinance, saying the review board would "be conflicting with a federal consent decree and state law."

Officers above the rank of sergeant currently consider complaints against Providence police. Led by the community action group DARE, critics charge that the process is slow and biased because hearing officers are unlikely to critically judge fellow cops. The process was established by a 1973 consent decree, which settled a police brutality lawsuit brought by a group of black leaders.

Sullivan, backed by the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), the police union, argues that the council must abide by the consent decree and cannot create a different process to investigate complaints against police. But David Cicilline, the lawyer advising DARE, disagrees. Cicilline, a state representative who's running against Cianci for mayor, says PERA would exist side by side with the discredited consent decree process. Citizens, he says, would select one process or the other.

Sullivan also argues that the Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights dooms PERA to failure. The law states that no officer can be compelled to testify "by any non-governmental agency," so police could refuse to testify, he states, leaving them open to the charge of stonewalling. But Cicilline says PERA would be considered a governmental body.

The argument that the Law Enforcement Officers Bill Of Rights trumps a civilian process is not new. Following passage of the law in 1976, the FOP unsuccessfully tried to nullify and then to modify the 1973 consent decree. US District Court Chief Judge Raymond Pettine ruled the two provisions could co-exist, as long as officers were not punished for asserting their Fifth Amendment right not to testify against themselves during the consent decree process.

Sullivan also questions whether Providence can afford to establish PERA. At Saturday's meeting, a budget of between $300,000 and $400,000 was proposed and Nolan stated that Finance Committee chair Kevin Jackson supports funding.

Sullivan, Cicilline, and DARE do agree on one thing: That a mediation process, in which the disgruntled citizen and the accused police officer informally talk, would resolve many disputes without a hearing.

The number of complaints is way down since he became chief in February 2001, Sullivan adds, because the department is now investigating problems before they become formal complaints. That argument draws a skeptical response from DARE organizer Mary Kay Harris: "Four hundred years of lack of accountability, but within his year, he's fixed everything."

Issue Date: May 31 - June 6, 2002