City Council approves citizens’ review board
July 2, 2012 at 7:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
Duluth City Council members approved an ordinance to create a citizens’ review board for complaints made against the Duluth Police Department. Continue Reading
It’s not racism, it’s simple stupidity in its purest form.
Let’s see here, back ground checks are free to the city, ensure that no felons make it on the review board and logically would be appropriate since this board deals deeply in police procedures. Yet somehow, yet again, common sense has no place with the liberal left of the Duluth city council.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
92 
13
Bullseye Don! We like you words a lot and published them.
Rikki don’t lose that number as felons have no business on the Citizens Review Board, no matter what race, end of story!
Rikki, many of us believe in Martain Luther King’s most memorable words when he stated, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character”.
Rikki, you words last night make me wonder why are you on the Citizens Review Board. Stop with the racism claims and show some tolerance of other peoples well intentioned views.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
78 
11
Exactly! Most companies do background checks for potential hires. It just makes sense to look into someone’s record. If they don’t agree the amendment then so be it. I can handle someone having a different opinion. Playing the race card diminishes what they are trying to accomplish. That I can’t handle!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53 
8
Exactly! Most companies do background checks for potential hires. It just makes sense to look into someone’s record. If they don’t agree the amendment then so be it. I can handle someone having a different opinion. Playing the race card diminishes what they are trying to accomplish. That I can’t handle!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
40 
7
Don you beat me to the punch, well said. In addition, the ones calling the background check racist are racists themselves by assuming only some races are felons. Having a convicted felon on a police review board is beyond ridiculous!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
79 
10
Poor Rikki….did he need to get his 5-minutes in the spotlight?
Of course you want to rule out felons! Background checks for a police task force!?! Duh!!!!
Rikki, please do the right thing and resign from the Task Force as you apparently already are bringing a racist mentality with you and that is not what is needed.
But what do I know…I’m European-American so I can’t see racism (or so I have been told).
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
62 
8
My question all along is if you have not violated a law what contact do you have with the police in the first place?
I personally think this board is a waste of time put together as a PC channel to appease a few advocates.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
66 
10
How about a citizen’s review board for the courts? How about a citizen’s review board for the welfare office? How about a citizen’s review board for the city council? How about a citizen’s review board for the school bored? How about a citizen’s review board for medical practitioners?
Every aspect of society has corruption and deceit operating within it and it will not be harnessed by a few citizens. If you want to make some progress and make the world a better place for everyone, tear them all down and start from scratch with some integrity.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
56 
10
With people knowing that felons can have access to the peoples personal info I suspect that the only ones that will use the review board will be the worst among us since they have nothing to lose. Who in their right mind would turn over their personal info to someone who is proven to disrespect the law?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54 
10
HERE IS A SHOCKER:
Duluth American Indian Commission Members:
Ricky DeFoe (Co-Chair)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47 
5
Is it really a stretch to belive that a convicted felon might have a conflict of intrest and/or serious “beef” with law enforcement and their actions and procedures ? I don’t get the racist thing….is he assuming most all minorities are convicted felons ?
How about we put a convicted embezzler on a board which is in a position to evaluate accounting procedures in the City Finance Office ? Would it be racist to oppose that ?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
51 
6
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
14 
47
Merv, you bring up a valid point. However, I believe you may run afoul of current law if you required background checks and prohibited felons from running for elected office. Regarding appointed (non elected) boards….your point may have more validity.
I think the ojections of some are in regards to the fact that felons obviously have had direct conflict with the very law enforcement agency they are now in a position to judge the actions of.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
42 
4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
10 
41
You just don’t get it. So you think it’s a great idea to give criminals sensitive information? Or to have a position of authority over law enforcement? Like putting the fox in charge of the hen house? Even felons should should have a voice…they do have rights. This goes beyond that. How is this review board going to have any public credibility?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
43 
8
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
7 
41
Nothing like the fox guarding the hen house! With all of the race problems this “unfair” campaign has caused, this is going to be an absolute train wreck. Can’t you already see it? If there are whites on the board and they don’t agree with any minorities on the board, they’re racist. If it’s all minorities on the board every cop in town better start looking for a new job. The ONLY way to remain subjective is to have NEVER commited a crime, white, black, Indian, smurf and be on the board, felons should be out of the question. I hate to reference facts, but if they can’t be on the board because they are felons, that will eliminate half the minority population. Don’t forget, anyone can look up anyone at minnesotajudicialbranch.gov, I’d venture to guess you’ll find ol Ricky on there.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
38 
7
Well then….let the public vote on who gets to be on this board. Put a bunch of names on the ballot and let us decide who would be qualified. And no…..just because they are on the board does not mean they are felons. If a convicted felon ran for mayor then so be it. At least the voters have a choice in the matter. As it stands…felons are not able to vote. Do you want to change that also??
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
4
My last post was for Merv…..
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
20 
5
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
4 
20
Merv….nobody is assuming any of the members are felons…..just that… because this board is responsible for police complaints…and are privy to sensitive and confidential matters concerning the police dept and possibly open criminal cases that are on-going….these members should have background checks before comming on board …….as this is going to be a very high profile board…..going to be controversy here! As far as other boards of directors, commissioners, school board members….they are not in the same boat as these folks are going to be…..plus, some boards, like the school board….city councilors etc……are elected members….they normally are scrutinized by debates….the media etc! As far as Mr Fosle’s ammendment goes…..he was being VERY RESPONSIBLE….NOT some political game….as you suggested!
Like or Dislike:
17 
5
Merv, my main argument is that perhaps not all boards need the same level of due diligence when appointing members. I’d not be nearly as concerned about background checks when appointing members of a board to monitor the beautification of City Parks, than I would be when appointing members of a board that directly oversees the law enforcement community and their standards and practices.
Having committed a felony in your past might not disqualify you depending on the circumstances and how long ago it was…..but don’t you think it prudent to know who you’re appointing to a rather important board ? After all, this board might be privey to all sorts of sensitive information on suspects and officers alike as well as the ability to cause all sorts of problems if that access and power isn’t used wisely and prudently.
Merv, you pointed our perviously why shouldn’t we do background checks on all boards etc… Do you really think that’s the way to go ? Aren’t we supposed to use our heads and some common sense here ? Would you personally worry as much about the background of the kid who mows your lawn weekly as you do about your financial advisor or the person who offers daycare for your kids ? Come on….it’s not all that difficult to see the difference here. The kid who mows your lawn might well be able to at best steal your lawnmower….your financial advisor might well have the ability to bankrupt your family….and the daycare provider, do we need to go there ?
You also mentioned in a pervious post that…(your quote below)
“By singling out the citizens’ review board, you’re basically saying, *the only people who should question authority are those who obey it. You can be in a position of authority and be a felon, but you can’t question authority if you’re a felon.* And that sentiment seems rather frightening to me.”
I am absolutely not saying that at all. As members of a free society it’s imperative that we all question authority. Far to few people do since way to many are distracted with different persuits that may seem of trivial importance to others….but that’s their right to do so and that’s another topic for a another discussion.
However, that being said, We are a nation of laws, and sworn officers have the task of upholding those very same laws….however imprefectly some may do so at times. So do you think it wise to potentially appoint a group of possible felons to give us their opinion on how fairly, accurately and effectively the police are upholding the law ? You most likely can’t absolutely count on any citizen to be totally objective at this task….but a felon has already proven in at least one instance that the law doesn’t really matter to them and they have chosen to ignore the law most likely in the persuit of personal gain of one fashion or another.
So, yes, in general, I do think non-felons would be a much better bet to evaluate how well officers uphold the letter and spirit of our existing laws.
Questioning authority doesn’t mean you have no respect for laws….it just means you’re not afraid to challenge bad laws when you see then and attempt to make changes through proper mechanisms. I might not like “tax and spend” politicians spending my tax dollars in certain ways….but I still need to pay my taxes to have much credibility in that debate.
Like or Dislike:
14 
6
If I were a citizen of Duluth I would demand the orgin of this ordinance. Based on the wording of this ordinance, this is not something that was whipped up by Gardner and Larsen over tea. The whole text can be found at:
http://www.duluthmn.gov/clerk/council/resord12/12-030-o.pdf
The ‘Duluth’ ordinance appears to stretch its stated purpose and put a undue burden of doubt and distrust over the entire police department. I would suspect it was plucked from the laws of San Fransico or New Orleans; both have large diverse communities with noted policing conflicts.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
36 
7
Merv, a convicted felon on a police review board is like having a convicted child molester on a private school admittance board, it just doesn’t work.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
46 
8
We are also going to need a double secret citizen’s review board to watch the regular citizen’s review board.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
32 
8
First of all, a felon who has completed their sentence CAN vote in most states. Might want to ditch that old piece of rhetoric.
Like or Dislike:
9 
11
And when is it a bad thing in our country for citizens to volunteer to monitor a government entity?
Like or Dislike:
13 
11
Very good point….nothing wrong with that…at all! Should be more of that kind of thing….would bring more “common sense” to the way Gov’t does business…as there seems to be a huge LACK of common sense these days….and has been the same for quite awhile! Anyway, kind of like a civilian President is in charge of the military…instead of Generals….like a civilian Sec’y of Defense in charge of the Pentagon etc……not saying they are doing a good job, currently……but you get my jest of your comment!
Like or Dislike:
11 
2
So if this amendment had passed, it would mean that someone who spray painted their high school 20 years ago would have no right to serve on the citizens review board.
Unless, of course, they happened to be good at hockey.
Like or Dislike:
8 
15
Vune, I’m not sure the intent was to automatically disquality someone with a felony conviction, but to at least know of it and evaluate the circumstances of it. There’s a big difference between something stupid done during your early years 25 years ago, and a willful and malicious crime committed in your more recent adult years that resulted in a felony conviction.
Like or Dislike:
12 
3
It might not have been the intent, but it would’ve been the outcome. The article says the amendment would simply “eliminate convicted felons.”
Everyone on the council will be appointed by the mayor and approved by the city council. Requiring background checks is a pointless distraction. It doesn’t seem “obviously racist” to me, it just seems paranoid.
Like or Dislike:
8 
9
Spray painting the high school isn’t a felony.
Like or Dislike:
0 
6
Vern, I get your jest. And I guess you think it is ok to live in a country where citizens take no part in the process, do not have a right to question those who hold authority and make national and local decisions. Wow…not much for democracy huh?
Like or Dislike:
6 
13
KDF….I guess i do not know how you came to that conclusion…….but, you are reading my post all wrong! I believe the citizens have every right to question……any body of authority……from local boards all the way to the President….as the citizenry IS THE FINAL AUTHORITY….and we exersize that authority AT THE BALLOT BOX!
Like or Dislike:
10 
3
I have read reports showing Ricky has had his share of run ins with the law but does anyone know of any felony convictions? That might be telling here!
Duluth needs some strong leadership to snuff out this whole racism mania that has taken over lately. You don’t help when you keep fanning the flames on a fire that is nearly out!
Like or Dislike:
14 
4
Sorry Vern..I read you totally wrong!
Like or Dislike:
8 
2
Access to police personnel files and internal law enforcement procedures is far different than city financial info, or any other board-related info for that matter. It should be restricted information due to the delicate nature of how said info could be misused and disseminated.
That you cannot recognize this is amusing and not at all surprising, Merv.
Like or Dislike:
12 
4