Proposal B in San Antonio

SAN ANTONIO – A showdown ends with a civilian murdered by a police officer. Outrage and protests follow. Then requires accountability.

And then it happens again, in another city in the United States.

To many, it seems that we are stuck in a cycle. That’s why activists in communities across the country are calling for police reform. And that is why you will have the opportunity to vote for or against Proposition B if you vote in the May 1 elections.

You’ve probably heard of the attempt to withdraw the collective bargaining power of the San Antonio Police Department. But there have been mixed reports on the issue, which has created confusion among voters. In this episode of KSAT Explains, we explain what Prop B is all about, the arguments for and against, and what it would and wouldn’t accomplish if passed. (Watch the full episode in the video player above.)

SMART. DEEP. LOCAL: Click here for more episodes of KSAT Explains

Last summer, local woman Oji Martin founded a group called Fix SAPD. Martin said she had reached her tipping point after George Floyd’s death in Minnesota and after watching Broken Blue, the KSAT special on misconduct and disciplinary proceedings within the San Antonio Police Department.

With the aim of reforming the police force, the group launched two petition campaigns to get two items on the May ballot. The ultimate goal was to repeal two local government codes that, among other things, provide protection for police officers who are under investigation.

“There is a lack of accountability in our police system, and that’s what causes all these problems,” Martin said when KSAT spoke to her about the petition in September.

In the end, Fix SAPD only collected enough signatures to get Prop B on the ballot – the proposed Texas Local Government Code Revocation Chapter 174. They are still working on the petition to revoke 143.

Chapter 174, explained

This is what Prop B looks like:

(City of San Antonio – Proposition B)

As with many voting initiatives, the wording itself is confusing. It calls for the repeal of Chapter 174, which allows police unions to negotiate collectively while enforcing the rule that officers cannot strike or lockout.

Collective bargaining is a process in which a union and their employer, in this case the city, determine wages, hours and working conditions for all workers the union represents: police officers. They are contract negotiations. And right now it is a big debate.

Fix SAPD said they decided to go after collective bargaining because they believe many of the police accountability issues start with the contract.

“You just follow the breadcrumbs and you realize that bad contracts lead to poor performance for some of these officials,” said Fix SAPD board member EJ Pinnock. “These contracts are drawn up by certain laws. In this case, state laws. And Prop B allows us to change all of those things. “

Definancing?

Fix SAPD believes that voting yes for Prop B is a step towards greater accountability. But the San Antonio Police Officers’ Association has labeled a vote for Prop B as a vote for the defunding of the police force.

“Defund the Police” became a national rallying cry in the aftermath of protests for police reform. It means reallocating resources from police forces to other government agencies.

But Prop B would not directly affect SAPD’s budget in any way.

Still, SAPOA President Danny Diaz argues that defunding would be the ultimate effect. Diaz says that because abolishing collective bargaining would remove one bargaining tool from the union, which he believes would jeopardize the competitive advantages for officers.

Fix SAPD calls the defund label for Prop B a scare tactic.

Of the eight largest cities in Texas, only San Antonio, El Paso and Corpus Christi use collective bargaining.

(Largest Texas cities with circled police collective bargaining.)

The union has wondered why Fix SAPD focuses primarily on collective bargaining, rather than specific parts of the police contract that they violate.

“Why didn’t they go after Articles 28 and 29,” said Diaz. “That’s what our discipline deals with.”

But we contacted the city. And, according to the San Antonio city attorney, Fix SAPD couldn’t get the contract to vote in the city.

So the process of negotiate that contract is in the sights of the group.

How many officers got their jobs back because of arbitration?

Certain aspects of the police union contract have been questioned for years.

A major sticking point – arbitration. Under the current contract, an officer fired by the police chief can have a third arbitrator determine whether they should get their job back.

The union states that arbitration has rarely returned an officer his or her job. They say it happened 10 times in 10 years. Fix SAPD says 70 percent of all SAPD officers fired get their jobs back.

This back and forth has been a huge point of contention in this debate. So which stat is true?

KSAT processed the figures. This is what we found:

From 2010 to the summer of 2020, 71 had been fired by police officers. Some of those cases are still pending. In 43 cases, the officer appealed their dismissal and it was decided to put that officer back to work. Ten of those officers got their jobs back through arbitration. Twenty were brought back by the police chief, which in some cases happens because it is becoming too expensive for the city to maintain an officer’s fire through the arbitration process.

This equates to 69.8 percent of the fired officers who are returned to the police from 2010 to 2019.

(Image: SAPD Jobs Reclaimed Via Arbitration.)

What else is in the police contract?

It is not just arbitration that has been put forward as one of the aspects of the collective bargaining agreement that requires closer examination.

Here are a few other often-criticized items in the police contract:

The police chief can only punish officers 180 days from the date of a violation.
During the disciplinary process, the police chief cannot consider misconduct older than 10 years for drug and alcohol offenses and more than five years for violent offenses.
The current contract allows officials accused of misconduct to speak with internal investigators 48 hours in advance.

Some of these issues are currently being discussed between the union and the city while they are negotiating. The current contract expires in September. The union claims they are already talking about possible changes, so why should they get rid of collective bargaining?

But Chapter 174 is only the first step in Fix SAPD’s plan to reform the police force.

San Antonians took over chapter 143, or “civil service,” in 1947. It is a broad law that governs how a city handles personnel issues for firefighters and police officers. It includes things like hiring, promotions and benefits. However, the official’s address does not pay.

Without collective bargaining, a contract between the city and the union is not required. The city staff and city administrator would recommend the officer’s salary and benefits, and the city council would vote whether to approve it.

But 143 covers layoffs and the process used for discipline. And because it’s there, even if Chapter 174 is repealed in May, the police still have protection.

What does Chapter 143 say about layoffs and discipline?

Think of Chapter 143 as a baseline for hiring, firing, and discipline. If a collective bargaining agreement disappears, 143 indicates how to proceed. Many of those rules are the same or similar to those laid down in the current contract between the city and the union.

For example, under 143, a hearing examiner can make a decision if a civil servant appeals against dismissal. Similar to arbitration.

Chapter 143 also says that only the police chief can view an officer’s personnel file, not the media or the general public. And it says that the police chief cannot suspend an officer for a crime that happened more than 180 days ago. This is also stated in the current contract.

That is why Fix SAPD wants chapter 143 to be withdrawn as well. But organizers say withdrawing 174 is the first step.

But Chapter 143 is a tougher target. Fix SAPD got the more than 20,000 signatures it took to place 174 in front of the voters. Revoking 143 requires approximately 80,000 signatures collected in 180 days.

Julia Gannaway, a lawyer who represents Texas cities in negotiations and civil service cases, said that, to her knowledge, no city has managed to repeal 143.

“143 is like Hotel California,” Gannaway said. “You can check in at any time, but you can never leave. You can’t get out. “

If collective bargaining is withdrawn in May, the police union and the city will still be able to negotiate a contract under what is known as a “meet and confer” system.

Think of it as a light for collective bargaining. It can still bring both sides to the negotiating table. But they don’t have to if they don’t want to.

(KSAT explains image for Prop B – Collective Bargaining Light)

The police union must agree to meet and consult with the city and file a petition. Then the city council has to approve it, or they can let voters decide.

Fix SAPD supports meet and confer and refers to the city of Austin as an example.

“In Austin, they actually have better pay, better benefits and a meet and confer system,” said Fix SAPD board member James Dykman during a Prop B debate held by KSAT, San Antonio Report and Bexar Facts. “We can still attract great officers to town, as they do.”

Are crime rates soaring in Texas? Would San Antonio police officers lose their competitive pay under a meet-and-conference system? Would citizens have a better overview if Prop B succeeds? Watch the video below to clarify some of the biggest questions surrounding the Prop B debate.

.Source

Share this:

Related