Police and protesters clash at Portland city hall over law enforcement contract

Portland demonstrators sought to stall a new police contract that increased pay for officers and raised questions about body camera policy.

Mike Zacchino/ The Oregonian via AP
Demonstrators partake in a protest outside of City Hall in Portland, Ore., Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2016. The Portland City Council approved a new police contract in a conference room that was blocked off from the general public because of protests that led to arrests.

Police used pepper spray and made arrests as demonstrators stormed City Hall in Portland, Oregon on Wednesday and tried to stop the City Council from voting on a new police contract that includes more pay for officers and raised questions about the future use of body cameras.

The demonstration forced Mayor Charlie Hales to stop the meeting, but city commissioners soon reconvened in a secure, third-floor room to vote while protesters from Black Lives Matter and Don't Shoot PDX were kept below.

Amid chants and shouts from below, the commissioners voted 3-1 in favor of the new contract, setting off another round of protests that briefly blocked public transit in the downtown core.

Protesters threw object at officers both inside and outside City Hall, the Portland Police Bureau said in a statement.

Protesters dispersed as darkness fell, but organizers said a demonstration was planned for Friday.

Hales' decision to move the meeting was unprecedented in recent city history, The Oregonian/OregonLive reported. The vote was streamed live on the city's home page.

Police eventually forced the protesters out of City Hall and into the streets.

Several were hit by pepper spray as officers cleared the doors.

Hales, the outgoing mayor, said the contract was "good for Portland."

Protesters were angry that Hales was bringing the matter to a vote now instead of letting his successor, Mayor-Elect Ted Wheeler, take up the issue in January so there could be more time for public input.

Police watchdog groups grew concerned earlier this month when an initial version of the contract guaranteed officers the right to view body camera footage before writing up any non-fatal encounters with civilians.

That language led to several smaller protests in the weeks leading up to Wednesday's vote.

Transparency advocates say that allowing police to view footage prior to writing their reports can "inform officers' accounts of an event in such a way that could be detrimental to civilians when they testify in court," The Christian Science Monitor reported in August:

According to [Chad Marlow of the American Civil Liberties Union], allowing officers to view body camera videos of an incident before they write their initial report, while preventing the civilians involved from seeing those videos, can naturally give officers an edge in judicial proceedings by allowing them to shape their story to the available evidence.

Commissioner Nick Fish told KATU-TV in a live interview Wednesday that the contract did not include any language on body camera policy.

"It was carved out and will be discussed with the community later," Fish told the station.

In a blog post Tuesday, Police Chief Mike Marshman said the new contract was urgently needed to help the city recruit new officers.

By the end of the month, the 880-member Portland Police Bureau will have nearly 90 vacancies due to retirements and another 385 officers are projected to retire in the next five years.

Better pay will help the city entice new hires and could deter current officers from leaving to work elsewhere, he said.

Marshman also reassured the public in his statement that any policies developed around body cameras will include public input.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.