We live in a large city, which seems a strange thing to say because it doesn’t feel that way. For many of us, Colorado Springs doesn’t feel like a big city because we have escaped most big city problems. The good thing about life here is that we enjoy many urban amenities but our lifestyle is definitely not Big City. Maybe it’s because the beauty of our mountains is so close and beauty always speaks for tranquility. But as the song says, “the times they are a-changin.” And change is coming for sure.

While not reaching the explosiveness of turmoil in other cities, we have experienced our share of unrest and that calls for change. The main concern is with public order and the relationship of the police with the public, specifically with certain sectors of the community. Motivated by a desire to head off disruption, and the Colorado Legislature’s Senate Bill 217, passed in June, known as the “Enhance Law Enforcement Integrity Act,” the Colorado Springs City Council is getting ready to establish the Law Enforcement Transparency and Accountability Commission.

Among the goals of this commission in the words of the enabling ordinance is to “promote improved understanding and relationships between the Police Department and the public.” Another goal is to “provide a conduit to share the concerns and needs of both citizens and the Police Department.” These goals are nonthreatening, but there is potential for real substantive change in police/community relations in the wording of the ordinance. This is in spite of the fact that the commission is not a Civilian Review Board, has no “teeth,” and will serve only in an advisory capacity to the City Council and presumably the mayor. In other cities, civilian review boards, whether independent or part of police agencies, typically are empowered to review and pass judgment on police conduct or misconduct, especially when it comes to the use of deadly force. This usually happens after the police have conducted their own internal review and issued a finding.

Most civilian review boards can overturn a police internal review finding but this is not the case with our commission. This is unsatisfactory to many who are advocating for change but it is how we typically do business in Colorado Springs. We need to understand the context here. In spite of the innocuous language of the ordinance, or maybe because of it, the advisory model seems to work, at least some of the time. Change does come about, albeit slowly and incrementally. The main thing is the process. In matters of public policy, after much discussion and deliberation, after all concerned have their say, decisions are made, votes are taken and people seem to be reconciled to the outcomes. Things settle down until the time comes for another round of negotiations, usually triggered by conflict left unresolved in the previous process. Sometimes the pressure for change increases and if strong enough something gives and change happens. Of course, it’s a type of conflict avoidance model, suited to our civic sense, because we don’t like conflict in this town and we do all we can to avoid it.

There is much room for improvement in police/community relations in Colorado Springs, and The Law Enforcement Transparency and Accountability Commission can indeed contribute to transparency and accountability. But things should be more clear cut now.

Let’s remember that it is now illegal in Colorado for the police to use chokeholds, that individual officers are liable for misconduct in civil suits up to $25,000, that police must be accountable and categorize traffic stops and other interactions with the public by reporting the race and ethnicity of the citizens involved, and that some kind of “diversity education” and “affirmative action” is now required or highly encouraged for police.

Joe Barrera, Ph.D., is the former director of the Ethnic Studies Program at UCCS. He is a combat veteran of the Vietnam War and teaches U.S. Military History, Southwest Studies and American Literature.

Joe Barrera