Commentary: More Thinking About the Police Audit

For those who did not catch Debra LoGuercio's column in yesterday's Davis Enterprise, it is worth a read if you haven't already turned your paper into compost. LoGuercio is editor of the Winter's Express, also owned by the McNaughtons.

LoGuercio really questions what we learned from this study that has been given coverage across the state from the non-profit group Cal-Aware. I have never directly submitted a public records requests with the Davis Police Department, but I have with the city and requested information from the Police Department with City Clerk Margaret Roberts and I have always been treated fairly and received the information I have wanted.

The most pertinent portion of her column though relates to our article that we ran on Sunday, January 14, 2007 that dealt with the handling of the story by the Davis Enterprise and tip off (claimed to be inadvertent) by Debbie Davis. If you haven't read the story there is a good response from Davis Enterprise reporter Cory Golden who was the reporter who conducted the audit. My major concern with the handling of it was that I believe the test should have been invalidated when Davis Enterprise Editor Davis tipped them off--hey mistakes happen, we understand that. But they continue. Interim Police Chief Steve Pierce then is quoted as saying his department would have handled it the same way, despite questions raised by the reporter himself in his notes to that effect. And the Davis Enterprise article never really illuminates all of this.

LoGuercio writes:

Some local police departments fared better. Dixon got an A-minus, Davis scored a B-plus, and Winters a B. However, not only was the Davis Police Department inadvertently tipped off about the audit, their "average citizen" was a familiar Davis Enterprise reporter. Big, fat cheaterheads. Davis should've gotten a zero and been disqualified. On the other hand… they cheated and still only got a B-plus? Losers. Elsewhere, Fairfield scored a solid F, while Suisun and Vacaville less-than-failed.

So let me get this straight, the police department that happens to be tipped off, also gets one of the higher grades. Now in fairness, again, Golden points out that in fact, a number of departments around the state figured out what was going on and still rated very low--which makes you all the more concerned.

Nevertheless our concern from the start was the lack of public accounting of this story--when you read the Enterprise it is more of a whitewash of the event buried in the middle of the story and without the background which should truly concern the average reader.

--Doug Paul Davis reporting

Davis Enterprise: Sabotage and Misreporting in Police Audit Study

In Friday morning’s Sacramento Bee—four Sac Bee staff writers composed a story on an audit of California law enforcement agency practices in response to public records requests. The audit was performed by a nonprofit group known as Californians Aware and conducted by reporters at 27 newspapers and three TV stations across the state. They visited 216 law enforcement offices in 34 counties on December 4, 2006. Overall, law enforcement agencies scored in the “F” range in terms of responsiveness to the compliance with the California Public Records Act.

The Sacramento Bee reported:

“The Davis Police Department earned a B minus, a low grade considering that a Davis Enterprise editor tipped the police chief to the audit on the day it [the requests] happened.”

In Friday’s Davis Enterprise, reporter Lauren Keene wrote a front page story on the audit. On the second page, she discussed in some detail the results from the Davis Police Department. In it she indicated, accurately,

“The Davis Police Department was the county’s highest-scoring agency, receiving a B+ from CalAware (which raised the agency’s grade from a B- in light of a scoring error discovered Thursday night).”

Moreover, she also reported that Interim Police Chief Steve Pierce was tipped off by a Davis Enterprise editor; however, Pierce “said it did not affect how his agency responded to the requests.”

This raised a number of questions about the efficacy of the scoring process and whether the Davis Enterprise had inappropriately sabotaged the process.

The Californians Aware website provides some of these answers. There is a detailed account of the audit conducted by Davis Enterprise reporter Corey Golden.

Golden provides us with detailed notes.

“On Dec. 4, just before 9 a.m., I went to the station. The front desk clerk recognized me immediately, though I'm not our regular police reporter. She accepted the requests but said the station was short-staffed. I offered to wait, but she said she would not be able to get to any of them that day. I was given the name of the head of the records department, Karen Berry, and was told she'd contact me. Within about two hours, the interim chief called my editor, Debbie Davis.”

Apparently Debbie Davis was supposed to stick to the script so as to not tip off the Police Chief to the fact that they were conducting an audit.

“Unfortunately, Debbie [Davis] did not stick to the script, explaining what was going on.”

Notice that Golden does not characterize this error as inadvertent or unintentional.

“The chief [Steve Pierce] said he'd fulfill the requests within 10 days. He later called and e-mailed me a couple of times with questions and in one voice mail mentioned that he and others were working on the requests.”

Contrary to the statement from Steve Pierce that “it did not affect how his agency responded to the requests,” Golden openly wonders whether an ordinary citizen in such a situation would encounter such devoted treatment from the interim Chief of Police and his staff.

“Certainly not the sort of situation a normal citizen would encounter, I'm sure. However, I suppose it says something that the interim chief knew exactly what these requests were for, but it still took until 12/13 -- nine days -- to fulfill them. What that says likely varies widely depending on your point of view.”

Golden does not jump to conclusions; however his questions—which were completely appropriate—are very telling.

More telling is that the Davis Enterprise never mentions Golden’s report nor his concerns about the process.

There are three critical concerns in this incident. First, the question has arisen in the past about the inappropriate collaboration between the Davis Enterprise and the Davis Police Department. Editor and Assistant Publisher Debbie Davis used exceedingly poor judgment in how she chose to handle this situation. Golden suggests that she “did not stick” to the script. The Davis Enterprise chooses to characterize this as inadvertent, but it is clear that Debbie Davis knew in advance the role that she was to play, so it is unclear how she could inadvertently disclose the reasons for the Public Records Act requests.

Second, there is an issue of reporting. Davis Enterprise reporter Lauren Keene does not disclose the misgivings that Golden expresses in his report. Instead she takes Pierce at his word that it had no effect on how his agency responded to the requests.

Finally, even knowing that the express purpose of the public records request was to test his department, Pierce could only score an 86 which was graded a B+. Pierce purportedly disagreed with some of the grading criteria:

“But Pierce took issue with some of the deductions, saying additional time was needed in some cases to properly fulfill the auditor’s requests. Collecting the desired crime and arrest reports was particularly time-consuming, he added.”

However, the bottom line is that this test and its purpose was revealed to Steve Pierce & the Davis Police Department and therefore loses any element of credibility that it might have had. Part of the test was to see how ordinary citizens are treated in response to requests for information. That test was sabotaged the moment Debbie Davis revealed to Steve Pierce that this was part of an audit and would be reported in the newspapers.

While Californians Aware was less concerned about any single department, this should have invalidated this examination of the Davis Police Department responsiveness and thoroughness as a part of the statewide study as soon as it was clear that the cover was blown and most likely intentionally so by Ms. Davis.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting